Literature DB >> 30617505

Robotic sacrocolpopexy: adverse events reported to the FDA over the last decade.

Colby Souders1, Farnoosh Nik-Ahd2, Hanson Zhao1, Karyn Eilber1, Bilal Chugtai3, Jennifer Anger4.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: As surgeons increase the volume of robotic abdominal sacrocolpopexies (rASCs) and become more experienced, a subsequent decrease in the number of adverse events is expected over time. Further, as the leading manufacturer of the operative robot (Intuitive Surgical) improves the technology, adverse events should also decrease. We hypothesized that there has been a decrease in adverse event reporting for rASCs and that serious adverse events are rare.
METHODS: We performed a search of the FDA Manufacturer and User Facility Device Experience (MAUDE) database. All entries with the manufacturer "Intuitive Surgical" were exported from 2007 to 2017. All entries with "sacrocolpopexy" were then isolated and analyzed.
RESULTS: The number of adverse events reported for rASC peaked in 2013 and 2014, at 107 and 124 respectively. In 2015 and 2016, the number dropped to 11 and 7 respectively. There were 334 reported adverse events from 2007 to 2017. Five (1.50%) were categorized as death, 33 (9.88%) as injury, and 296 (88.62%) as malfunction. Analysis of the malfunction reports found that 15 out of 296 (5.07%) were converted to open surgery, 4 out of 296 (1.3%) were converted to laparoscopic surgery, 4 out of 296 (1.3%) cases were aborted, and 6 out of 296 (2.03%) malfunctions resulted in patient injury.
CONCLUSIONS: Although the MAUDE database has its limitations, it does indicate that the number of adverse events reported for rASC peaked in 2013 and 2014 and has decreased annually since then. This may be due to improved proficiency of the surgeon and surgical team, in addition to improvements in the robot. When malfunctions do occur, they infrequently cause serious injury or have an impact on surgical approach.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Abdominal sacrocolpopexy; Adverse events; Pelvic organ prolapse; Robotic surgery

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 30617505     DOI: 10.1007/s00192-018-3845-6

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int Urogynecol J        ISSN: 0937-3462            Impact factor:   2.894


  8 in total

Review 1.  Device failures associated with patient injuries during robot-assisted laparoscopic surgeries: a comprehensive review of FDA MAUDE database.

Authors:  Sero Andonian; Zeph Okeke; Deidre A Okeke; Ardeshir Rastinehad; Brian A Vanderbrink; Lee Richstone; Benjamin R Lee
Journal:  Can J Urol       Date:  2008-02       Impact factor: 1.344

Review 2.  Outcomes of robotic sacrocolpopexy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Catherine O Hudson; Gina M Northington; Robert H Lyles; Deborah R Karp
Journal:  Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg       Date:  2014 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 2.091

3.  Pelvic organ prolapse surgery in Finland from 1987 to 2009: A national register based study.

Authors:  Kaisa Kurkijärvi; Riikka Aaltonen; Mika Gissler; Juha Mäkinen
Journal:  Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol       Date:  2017-04-04       Impact factor: 2.435

Review 4.  Instrument Failures for the da Vinci Surgical System: a Food and Drug Administration MAUDE Database Study.

Authors:  Diana C W Friedman; Thomas S Lendvay; Blake Hannaford
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2012-12-14       Impact factor: 4.584

5.  Robotic compared with laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy: a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Jennifer T Anger; Elizabeth R Mueller; Christopher Tarnay; Bridget Smith; Kevin Stroupe; Amy Rosenman; Linda Brubaker; Catherine Bresee; Kimberly Kenton
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2014-01       Impact factor: 7.661

6.  Forecasting the prevalence of pelvic floor disorders in U.S. Women: 2010 to 2050.

Authors:  Jennifer M Wu; Andrew F Hundley; Rebekah G Fulton; Evan R Myers
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2009-12       Impact factor: 7.661

Review 7.  Abdominal sacrocolpopexy: a comprehensive review.

Authors:  Ingrid E Nygaard; Rebecca McCreery; Linda Brubaker; AnnaMarie Connolly; Geoff Cundiff; Anne M Weber; Halina Zyczynski
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2004-10       Impact factor: 7.661

8.  An evaluation of the Manufacturer And User Facility Device Experience database that inspired the United States Food and Drug Administration's Reclassification of transvaginal mesh.

Authors:  Jason M Sandberg; Ian Gray; Amy Pearlman; Ryan P Terlecki
Journal:  Investig Clin Urol       Date:  2018-01-29
  8 in total
  1 in total

Review 1.  Robotic-assisted repair of pelvic organ prolapse: a scoping review of the literature.

Authors:  Jeffrey S Schachar; Catherine A Matthews
Journal:  Transl Androl Urol       Date:  2020-04
  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.