Comparing Postoperative Pain With Laparoscopic Versus Robotic Sacrocolpopexy

被引:2
|
作者
Nilsson, Wesley [1 ,5 ]
Schmidt, Megan [2 ]
Turner, Lindsay [3 ,4 ]
Shepherd, Jonathan [1 ,3 ,4 ]
机构
[1] UConn Hlth John Dempsy Hosp, Dept Obstet & Gynecol, Div Minimally Invas Gynecol Surg, Farmington, CT USA
[2] Trinity Hlth New England, Dept Obstet Gynecol, Hartford, CT USA
[3] Univ Pittsburgh, Magee Womens Res Inst, Dept Obstet & Gynecol, Div Urogynecol,Allegheny Hlth Network, Pittsburgh, PA USA
[4] Univ Pittsburgh, Magee Womens Res Inst, Dept Obstet Gynecol & Reprod Sci, Div Urogynecol & Pelv Reconstruct Surg, Pittsburgh, PA USA
[5] UConn Hlth John Dempsy Hosp, Dept Obstet & Gynecol, Div Minimally Invas Gynecol Surg, 263 Farmington Ave, Farmington, CT 06030 USA
关键词
Minimally invasive; Laparoscopy; Robotic; Pelvic organ prolapse; Pain; Sacrocolpopexy; HYSTERECTOMY; INFILTRATION;
D O I
10.1016/j.jmig.2023.11.016
中图分类号
R71 [妇产科学];
学科分类号
100211 ;
摘要
Study Objective: To compare postoperative pain and pain-related outcomes after laparoscopic (LS-MISC) vs robotic minimally invasive sacrocolpopexy (R-MISC). Design: A secondary analysis of an original placebo-controlled randomized controlled trial (RCT) examining preoperative intravenous (IV) acetaminophen on postoperative pain after MISC. Setting: Planned secondary analysis of multicenter RCT. Patients: Women undergoing MISC. Interventions: Coprimary outcomes at 24 hours were total opioid use in morphine milligram equivalents (MMEs) and visual analog scale (VAS) pain scores comparing LS-MISC and R-MISC. The secondary outcome was pain scores using a pain diary through 7 days after the procedure. Measurements and Main Results: The original study was a double-blind, multicenter, RCT comparing IV acetaminophen with placebo that took place between 2014 and 2017. Given that the original trial was unable to show an impact from the use of IV acetaminophen, our analysis focused on the impact of surgical modality. We included 90 subjects undergoing MISC: 65 LS-MISC and 25 R-MISC. Most were Caucasian (97.8%) and postmenopausal (88.9%) with mean age of 61.2 +/- 7.2 years and body mass index of 27.6 +/- 4.4 kg/m(2). IV acetaminophen did not affect pain in the original study and was not different between LS-MISC and R-MISC. Concomitant hysterectomy was performed in 67% (LS-MISC) vs 60% (R-MISC, p = .49). LS-MISC underwent more perineorrhaphies (15.4% vs 0%, p = .04) and posterior repairs (18.5% vs 0%, p = .02). Operative time was longer with LS-MISC (208.5 +/- 57.3 vs 143.6 +/- 21.0 minutes, p <.01). Length of stay was longer with LS-MISC (0.9 +/- 0.4 vs 0.7 +/- 0.4 days, p = .02). Women undergoing LS-MISC consumed more opioid MMEs through 24 hours when including intraoperative opioids (48.5 +/- 25.5 vs 35.1 +/- 14.6 MME, p <.01). Using linear regression correcting for operative time and concomitant vaginal repairs, this difference disappeared. Likewise, when intraoperative opioids were excluded, there was no difference. There were no differences in 24-hour postoperative VAS scores, opioid use in the first week, or quality of life (Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System - Pain Interference Short Form, all p <.05). Conclusion: When comparing VAS pain scores, MME opioid usage, and quality of life between LS-MISC and R-MISC, either there was no difference or differences disappeared after adjusting for confounders. Overall, opioid use, pain scores, and opioid side effects were low.
引用
收藏
页码:200 / 204
页数:5
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Laparoscopic Versus Abdominal Sacrocolpopexy: A Randomized, Controlled Trial
    Costantini, Elisabetta
    Mearini, Luigi
    Lazzeri, Massimo
    Bini, Vittorio
    Nunzi, Elisabetta
    di Biase, Manuel
    Porena, Massimo
    JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2016, 196 (01) : 159 - 165
  • [32] Outcomes of Laparoscopic versus Robotic-Assisted Sacrocolpopexy for Pelvic Organ Prolapse-A Comprehensive Retrospective Analysis
    Dehan, Chloe
    Marcelle, Sarah
    Nisolle, Michelle
    Munaut, Carine
    de Landsheere, Laurent
    INTERNATIONAL UROGYNECOLOGY JOURNAL, 2024, : 2203 - 2210
  • [33] Postoperative complications and unanticipated healthcare encounters following mini-laparotomy vs. laparoscopic/robotic-assisted sacrocolpopexy: a comparative retrospective study
    Chill, Henry H.
    Hadizadeh, Alireza
    Paya-Ten, Claudia
    Leffelman, Angela
    Chang, Cecilia
    Moss, Nani P.
    Goldberg, Roger P.
    BMC WOMENS HEALTH, 2024, 24 (01)
  • [34] A Prospective Randomized Trial Comparing Restorelle Y Mesh and Flat Mesh for Laparoscopic and Robotic-Assisted Laparoscopic Sacrocolpopexy
    Ferrando, Cecile A.
    Paraiso, Marie Fidela R.
    FEMALE PELVIC MEDICINE AND RECONSTRUCTIVE SURGERY, 2019, 25 (02): : 83 - 87
  • [35] Minilaparoscopic Versus Conventional Laparoscopic Sacrocolpopexy: A Comparative Study
    Ferreira, Helder
    Ferreira, Carlos
    Nogueira-Silva, Cristina
    Tome, Antonio
    Guimaraes, Serafim
    Correia-Pinto, Jorge
    JOURNAL OF LAPAROENDOSCOPIC & ADVANCED SURGICAL TECHNIQUES, 2016, 26 (05): : 386 - 392
  • [36] Mesh Erosion in Robotic Sacrocolpopexy
    Osmundsen, Blake C.
    Clark, Amanda
    Goldsmith, Crystal
    Adams, Kerrie
    Denman, Mary Anna
    Edwards, Renee
    Gregory, William Thomas
    FEMALE PELVIC MEDICINE AND RECONSTRUCTIVE SURGERY, 2012, 18 (02): : 86 - 88
  • [37] Robotic sacrocolpopexy
    Mozon, Al-Otaibi
    Kim, Ju Hee
    Lee, Sa Ra
    OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY SCIENCE, 2024, 67 (02) : 212 - 217
  • [38] Single port robotic assisted sacrocolpopexy: technique and tips
    Lauren Griebel
    M. Misal
    J. Cornella
    A. Khan
    C. Wolter
    J. Yi
    International Urogynecology Journal, 2022, 33 : 2905 - 2905
  • [39] Comparison of Postural Ergonomics Between Laparoscopic and Robotic Sacrocolpopexy: A Pilot Study
    Tarr, Megan E.
    Brancato, Sam J.
    Cunkelman, Jacqueline A.
    Polcari, Anthony
    Nutter, Benjamin
    Kenton, Kimberly
    JOURNAL OF MINIMALLY INVASIVE GYNECOLOGY, 2015, 22 (02) : 234 - 238
  • [40] Single port robotic assisted sacrocolpopexy: technique and tips
    Griebel, Lauren
    Misal, M.
    Cornella, J.
    Khan, A.
    Wolter, C.
    Yi, J.
    INTERNATIONAL UROGYNECOLOGY JOURNAL, 2022, 33 (10) : 2905 - 2905