Su Hyun Nam1, Jiheum Paek2, Chahien Choi1, Se Hyun Nam1, Woo Young Kim3. 1. Department of Obstetrics & Gynecology, Kangbuk Samsung Hospital, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea. 2. Gynecologic Cancer Center, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Ajou University School of Medicine, Suwon, Republic of Korea. 3. Department of Obstetrics & Gynecology, Kangbuk Samsung Hospital, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea. Electronic address: wykim.kim@samsung.com.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To compare the surgical outcomes between reduced-port robotic surgery (RPRS) using the Octo-Port channel and multiport robot-assisted laparoscopy for myomectomy. STUDY DESIGN: This prospective study compared and analyzed data from 15 consecutive women who underwent RPRS for myomectomy and 15 consecutive women who underwent multiport robot-assisted laparoscopy to treat symptomatic uterine myoma from January 2016 to June 2016. The patients were treated by two surgeons at two institutions. RESULTS: The two study groups did not differ demographically. The differences in surgical outcomes, such as docking time, console time, hospital stay, estimated blood loss, Hb change, myoma count, and weight, also did not differ between the two groups. On the contrary, the number of port site was only 2 in RPRS compared with 4-5 in multiport robot-assisted laparoscopic myomectomy. CONCLUSION: RPRS for myomectomy seems technically feasible and safe, with short-term perioperative outcomes similar to those from multiport robot-assisted laparoscopic myomectomy.
OBJECTIVE: To compare the surgical outcomes between reduced-port robotic surgery (RPRS) using the Octo-Port channel and multiport robot-assisted laparoscopy for myomectomy. STUDY DESIGN: This prospective study compared and analyzed data from 15 consecutive women who underwent RPRS for myomectomy and 15 consecutive women who underwent multiport robot-assisted laparoscopy to treat symptomatic uterine myoma from January 2016 to June 2016. The patients were treated by two surgeons at two institutions. RESULTS: The two study groups did not differ demographically. The differences in surgical outcomes, such as docking time, console time, hospital stay, estimated blood loss, Hb change, myoma count, and weight, also did not differ between the two groups. On the contrary, the number of port site was only 2 in RPRS compared with 4-5 in multiport robot-assisted laparoscopic myomectomy. CONCLUSION: RPRS for myomectomy seems technically feasible and safe, with short-term perioperative outcomes similar to those from multiport robot-assisted laparoscopic myomectomy.
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