Literature DB >> 27638566

Robotically assisted hysterectomy: 100 cases after the learning curve.

Thomas N Payne1,2, Francis R Dauterive3.   

Abstract

To report on perioperative outcomes of robotic hysterectomy after the learning curve, we performed a retrospective review of our second 100 consecutive robotic hysterectomies performed by two surgeons between January 2007 and February 2008. Operative time following our learning curve was 79.3 ± 36.1 min. Patient age was 44.2 ± 9.6 years, body mass index (BMI) was 30.9 ± 8.3 kg/m(2), and uterine weight was 223.7 ± 195.8 g. Indications for surgery included fibroids, menstrual disorders, and endometriosis. We performed total robotic-assisted laparoscopic hysterectomy type IVE. There were no conversions, no blood transfusions, and one cystotomy, repaired intraoperatively. Blood loss was 68.8 ± 105.8 cc, and average length of stay was 1.1 ± 0.3 days. There were no postoperative complications. Perioperative outcomes demonstrate low average operative times with a high level of safety on a broadened patient population, suggesting a potential advantage to using the robotic platform.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Benign hysterectomy; Learning curve; Robotic-assisted laparoscopic hysterectomy; da Vinci Surgical System

Year:  2010        PMID: 27638566     DOI: 10.1007/s11701-010-0174-2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Robot Surg        ISSN: 1863-2483


  38 in total

1.  Computer-enhanced robotic surgery in gynecologic oncology.

Authors:  Jayson B Field; Michelle F Benoit; Tri A Dinh; Concepcion Diaz-Arrastia
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2006-12-19       Impact factor: 4.584

Review 2.  New techniques in advanced laparoscopic surgery.

Authors:  H Reich
Journal:  Baillieres Clin Obstet Gynaecol       Date:  1989-09

3.  Laparoscopically assisted vaginal hysterectomy versus total abdominal hysterectomy: a prospective, randomized, multicenter study.

Authors:  R Marana; M Busacca; E Zupi; N Garcea; P Paparella; G F Catalano
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  1999-02       Impact factor: 8.661

4.  Inpatient hysterectomy surveillance in the United States, 2000-2004.

Authors:  Maura K Whiteman; Susan D Hillis; Denise J Jamieson; Brian Morrow; Michelle N Podgornik; Kate M Brett; Polly A Marchbanks
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2007-11-05       Impact factor: 8.661

5.  Guidelines to determine the route of hysterectomy.

Authors:  S R Kovac
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  1995-01       Impact factor: 7.661

6.  Comparison of outcomes and cost for endometrial cancer staging via traditional laparotomy, standard laparoscopy and robotic techniques.

Authors:  Maria C Bell; Jenny Torgerson; Usha Seshadri-Kreaden; Allison Wierda Suttle; Sharon Hunt
Journal:  Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2008-10-01       Impact factor: 5.482

7.  Robot-assisted laparoscopic hysterectomy: technique and initial experience.

Authors:  R Kevin Reynolds; Arnold P Advincula
Journal:  Am J Surg       Date:  2006-04       Impact factor: 2.565

8.  A case-control study of robot-assisted type III radical hysterectomy with pelvic lymph node dissection compared with open radical hysterectomy.

Authors:  John F Boggess; Paola A Gehrig; Leigh Cantrell; Aaron Shafer; Mildred Ridgway; Elizabeth N Skinner; Wesley C Fowler
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2008-10       Impact factor: 8.661

9.  Laparoscopic hysterectomy using a computer-enhanced surgical robot.

Authors:  C Diaz-Arrastia; C Jurnalov; G Gomez; C Townsend
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2002-06-27       Impact factor: 4.584

10.  A multi-institutional experience with robotic-assisted radical hysterectomy for early stage cervical cancer.

Authors:  M Patrick Lowe; Donald H Chamberlain; Scott A Kamelle; Peter R Johnson; Todd D Tillmanns
Journal:  Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2009-02-26       Impact factor: 5.482

View more
  3 in total

1.  Does size matter? The effect of uterine weight on robot-assisted total laparoscopic hysterectomy outcomes.

Authors:  Mona E Orady; A Karim Nawfal; Ganesa Wegienka
Journal:  J Robot Surg       Date:  2011-05-13

2.  Comparison of robotic-assisted hysterectomy to other minimally invasive approaches.

Authors:  Mona Orady; Alexander Hrynewych; A Karim Nawfal; Ganesa Wegienka
Journal:  JSLS       Date:  2012 Oct-Dec       Impact factor: 2.172

3.  [DeRAS I-German situation of robotic-assisted surgery-an online survey].

Authors:  C M Krüger; O Rückbeil; U Sebestyen; T Schlick; J Kürbis; H Riediger
Journal:  Chirurg       Date:  2021-06-25       Impact factor: 0.955

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.