Stefano Bogliolo1, Simone Ferrero2, Chiara Cassani3, Valentina Musacchi3, Francesca Zanellini3, Mattia Dominoni3, Arsenio Spinillo3, Barbara Gardella3. 1. Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, IRCCS, Fondazione Policlinico San Matteo and University of Pavia, Pavia, Italy. Electronic address: s.bogliolo@smatteo.pv.it. 2. Unit of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, IRCCS AOU San Martino-IST, Genova, Italy; Department of Neurosciences, Rehabilitation, Ophthalmology, Genetics, Maternal and Child Health, University of Genova, Genova, Italy. 3. Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, IRCCS, Fondazione Policlinico San Matteo and University of Pavia, Pavia, Italy.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To compare the surgical outcomes and costs of robotic-assisted hysterectomy with the single-site (RSSH) or multiport approach (RH). DESIGN: A retrospective analysis of a prospectively collected database (Canadian Task Force classification II1). SETTING: A university hospital. PATIENTS: Consecutive women who underwent robotic-assisted total laparoscopic hysterectomy and bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy for the treatment of benign gynecologic diseases. INTERVENTIONS: Data on surgical approach, surgical outcomes, and costs were collected in a prospective database and retrospectively analyzed. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The total operative time, console time, docking time, estimated blood loss, conversion rate, and surgical complications rate were compared between the 2 study groups. Cost analysis was performed. One hundred four patients underwent total robotic-assisted hysterectomy and bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy (45 RSSH and 59 RH). There was no significant difference in the indications for surgery and in the characteristics of the patients between the 2 study groups. There was no significant difference between the single-site and multiport approach in console time, surgical complication rate, conversion rate, and postoperative pain. The docking time was lower in the RH group (p = .0001). The estimated blood loss and length of hospitalization were lower in the RSSH group (p = .0008 and p = .009, respectively). The cost analysis showed significant differences in favor of RSSH. CONCLUSION: RSSH should be preferred to RH when hysterectomy is performed for benign disease because it could be at least as equally effective and safe with a potential cost reduction. However, because of the high cost and absence of clear advantages, the robotic approach should be considered only for selected patients.
OBJECTIVE: To compare the surgical outcomes and costs of robotic-assisted hysterectomy with the single-site (RSSH) or multiport approach (RH). DESIGN: A retrospective analysis of a prospectively collected database (Canadian Task Force classification II1). SETTING: A university hospital. PATIENTS: Consecutive women who underwent robotic-assisted total laparoscopic hysterectomy and bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy for the treatment of benign gynecologic diseases. INTERVENTIONS: Data on surgical approach, surgical outcomes, and costs were collected in a prospective database and retrospectively analyzed. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The total operative time, console time, docking time, estimated blood loss, conversion rate, and surgical complications rate were compared between the 2 study groups. Cost analysis was performed. One hundred four patients underwent total robotic-assisted hysterectomy and bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy (45 RSSH and 59 RH). There was no significant difference in the indications for surgery and in the characteristics of the patients between the 2 study groups. There was no significant difference between the single-site and multiport approach in console time, surgical complication rate, conversion rate, and postoperative pain. The docking time was lower in the RH group (p = .0001). The estimated blood loss and length of hospitalization were lower in the RSSH group (p = .0008 and p = .009, respectively). The cost analysis showed significant differences in favor of RSSH. CONCLUSION:RSSH should be preferred to RH when hysterectomy is performed for benign disease because it could be at least as equally effective and safe with a potential cost reduction. However, because of the high cost and absence of clear advantages, the robotic approach should be considered only for selected patients.
Authors: S Cianci; A Rosati; V Rumolo; S Gueli Alletti; V Gallotta; L C Turco; G Corrado; G Vizzielli; A Fagotti; F Fanfani; G Scambia; S Uccella Journal: World J Surg Date: 2019-10 Impact factor: 3.352
Authors: Gaby N Moawad; Paul Tyan; Jiheum Paek; Erryn E Tappy; Daniel Park; Souzanna Choussein; Serene S Srouji; Antonio Gargiulo Journal: J Robot Surg Date: 2019-01-21
Authors: Mohamed El Alili; Johanna M van Dongen; Judith A F Huirne; Maurits W van Tulder; Judith E Bosmans Journal: Pharmacoeconomics Date: 2017-10 Impact factor: 4.981