Literature DB >> 25800401

Robotic pelvic organ prolapse surgery.

Kamran P Sajadi1, Howard B Goldman2.   

Abstract

Robotic sacrocolpopexy (RSC) has rapidly gained popularity over the past 10 years, owing to claims that it is associated with a reduced learning curve compared with standard laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy (LSC) and that it has equal efficacy to the gold-standard treatment, abdominal sacrocolpopexy (ASC). The specifics of the surgical technique used for RSC vary widely, but the basic steps and principles are largely the same. Although complication rates are low, specific complications can be minimized by meticulous attention to surgical technique at several important points in the procedure. Multiple levels of evidence support the efficacy of RSC, and show that it is associated with a shorter hospital stay and convalescence than ASC. The learning curve for RSC usually comprises 10-20 procedures but for those with extensive experience of laparoscopy it is likely to be even shorter. RSC is more expensive than LSC but cheaper than ASC. As RSC has only been used for about a decade, we await long-term outcomes of more than a few years.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25800401     DOI: 10.1038/nrurol.2015.51

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Nat Rev Urol        ISSN: 1759-4812            Impact factor:   14.432


  71 in total

1.  Lumbosacral osteomyelitis after robot-assisted total laparoscopic hysterectomy and sacral colpopexy.

Authors:  Tyler M Muffly; Gouri B Diwadkar; Marie Fidela R Paraiso
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2010-06-08       Impact factor: 2.894

2.  Prospective evaluation of surgical outcomes of robot-assisted sacrocolpopexy and sacrocervicopexy for the management of apical pelvic support defects.

Authors:  Catherine A Matthews; Ashley Carroll; Audra Hill; Viswanathan Ramakrishnan; Edward J Gill
Journal:  South Med J       Date:  2012-05       Impact factor: 0.954

3.  Long-term results of robotic assisted laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy for the treatment of high grade vaginal vault prolapse.

Authors:  Daniel S Elliott; Amy E Krambeck; George K Chow
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2006-08       Impact factor: 7.450

4.  Effect of surgical approach on physical activity and pain control after sacral colpopexy.

Authors:  Sarah A Collins; Paul K Tulikangas; David M O'Sullivan
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2012-02-01       Impact factor: 8.661

5.  Abdominal sacrocolpopexy for vault prolapse without burial of mesh: a case series.

Authors:  Sohier Elneil; Alfred S Cutner; Mary Remy; Andrew T Leather; Philip Toozs-Hobson; Brian Wise
Journal:  BJOG       Date:  2005-04       Impact factor: 6.531

6.  Analysis of robotic performance times to improve operative efficiency.

Authors:  Elizabeth J Geller; Feng-Chang Lin; Catherine A Matthews
Journal:  J Minim Invasive Gynecol       Date:  2012-11-08       Impact factor: 4.137

7.  Robotic-assisted sacrocolpopexy: technique and learning curve.

Authors:  Mohamed N Akl; Jaime B Long; Dobie L Giles; Jeffrey L Cornella; Paul D Pettit; Anita H Chen; Paul M Magtibay
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2009-01-27       Impact factor: 4.584

8.  Lifetime risk of stress urinary incontinence or pelvic organ prolapse surgery.

Authors:  Jennifer M Wu; Catherine A Matthews; Mitchell M Conover; Virginia Pate; Michele Jonsson Funk
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2014-06       Impact factor: 7.661

9.  Changes in prolapse surgery trends relative to FDA notifications regarding vaginal mesh.

Authors:  Laura C Skoczylas; Lindsay C Turner; Li Wang; Daniel G Winger; Jonathan P Shepherd
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2013-10-01       Impact factor: 2.894

10.  Supracervical robotic-assisted laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy for pelvic organ prolapse.

Authors:  Aaron D Benson; Brandan A Kramer; Robert O Wayment; Bradley F Schwartz
Journal:  JSLS       Date:  2010 Oct-Dec       Impact factor: 2.172

View more
  6 in total

1.  The impact of fellowship surgical training on operative time and patient morbidity during robotics-assisted sacrocolpopexy.

Authors:  Charelle M Carter-Brooks; Angela L Du; Michael J Bonidie; Jonathan P Shepherd
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2017-09-09       Impact factor: 2.894

2.  Transient Left-Sided Paralysis following Robotic-Assisted Laparoscopic Uteropexy.

Authors:  Jasmina Kurdija; Jan G Jakobsson
Journal:  Case Rep Anesthesiol       Date:  2015-05-26

3.  Surgical Outcomes and Safety of Robotic Sacrocolpopexy in Women With Apical Pelvic Organ Prolapse.

Authors:  Hyun Hwan Sung; Kwang Jin Ko; Yoon Seok Suh; Gyu Ha Ryu; Kyu-Sung Lee
Journal:  Int Neurourol J       Date:  2017-03-24       Impact factor: 2.835

Review 4.  Surgical options for full-thickness rectal prolapse: current status and institutional choice.

Authors:  Tomohide Hori; Daiki Yasukawa; Takafumi Machimoto; Yoshio Kadokawa; Toshiyuki Hata; Tatsuo Ito; Shigeru Kato; Yuki Aisu; Yusuke Kimura; Yuichi Takamatsu; Taku Kitano; Tsunehiro Yoshimura
Journal:  Ann Gastroenterol       Date:  2017-12-15

Review 5.  Regenerative robotics.

Authors:  Dana D Damian
Journal:  Birth Defects Res       Date:  2019-06-11       Impact factor: 2.344

6.  Chronic Pelvic Pain, Quality of Life, and Patient Satisfaction After Robotic Sacrocolpopexy for Pelvic Organ Prolapse.

Authors:  Nimesh Patel; Priyansh Faldu; Mohamed Fayed; Hannah Milad; Pradeep Nagaraju
Journal:  Cureus       Date:  2022-08-17
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.