Jong Ha Hwang1, Bo Wook Kim2, Soo Rim Kim2, Jang Heub Kim2. 1. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, International St. Mary's Hospital, Catholic Kwandong University College of Medicine, Incheon, Republic of Korea (all authors). Electronic address: jh36640@hanmail.net. 2. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, International St. Mary's Hospital, Catholic Kwandong University College of Medicine, Incheon, Republic of Korea (all authors).
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to compare the risks of intraoperative and postoperative urologic complications after robotic radical hysterectomy (RRH) compared with laparoscopic radical hysterectomy (LRH). DATA SOURCES: We searched Pubmed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library for studies published up to March 2019. Related articles and relevant bibliographies of published studies were also checked. METHODS OF STUDY SELECTION: Two researchers independently performed data extraction. We selected comparative studies that reported perioperative urologic complications. TABULATION, INTEGRATION, AND RESULTS: Twenty-three eligible clinical trials were included in this analysis. When all studies were pooled, the odds ratio for the risk of any urologic complication after RRH compared with LRH was .91 (95% confidence interval [CI], .64-1.28; p = .585). The odds ratios for intraoperative and postoperative complications after RRH versus LRH were .86 (95% CI, .48-1.55; p = .637) and .94 (95% CI, .64-1.38; p = .767), respectively. In a secondary analysis study quality, study location, and the publication year were not associated with intraoperative or postoperative urologic complications. CONCLUSION: Current evidence suggests that RRH is not superior to LRH in terms of perioperative urologic complications.
OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to compare the risks of intraoperative and postoperative urologic complications after robotic radical hysterectomy (RRH) compared with laparoscopic radical hysterectomy (LRH). DATA SOURCES: We searched Pubmed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library for studies published up to March 2019. Related articles and relevant bibliographies of published studies were also checked. METHODS OF STUDY SELECTION: Two researchers independently performed data extraction. We selected comparative studies that reported perioperative urologic complications. TABULATION, INTEGRATION, AND RESULTS: Twenty-three eligible clinical trials were included in this analysis. When all studies were pooled, the odds ratio for the risk of any urologic complication after RRH compared with LRH was .91 (95% confidence interval [CI], .64-1.28; p = .585). The odds ratios for intraoperative and postoperative complications after RRH versus LRH were .86 (95% CI, .48-1.55; p = .637) and .94 (95% CI, .64-1.38; p = .767), respectively. In a secondary analysis study quality, study location, and the publication year were not associated with intraoperative or postoperative urologic complications. CONCLUSION: Current evidence suggests that RRH is not superior to LRH in terms of perioperative urologic complications.