Robotic Compared With Conventional Laparoscopic Hysterectomy A Randomized Controlled Trial

被引:146
作者
Sarlos, Dimitri [1 ]
Kots, LaVonne
Stevanovic, Nebojsa
von Felten, Stefanie
Schaer, Gabriel
机构
[1] Kantonsspital Aarau, Dept Obstet & Gynaecol, CH-5001 Aarau, Switzerland
关键词
ASSISTED VAGINAL HYSTERECTOMY; ABDOMINAL HYSTERECTOMY; CURRENT STATE; OUTCOMES; SURGERY;
D O I
10.1097/AOG.0b013e318265b61a
中图分类号
R71 [妇产科学];
学科分类号
100211 ;
摘要
OBJECTIVE: To compare surgical outcome and quality of life of robot-assisted laparoscopic hysterectomy with conventional laparoscopic hysterectomy. METHODS: For this controlled clinical trial, patients with benign indications for hysterectomy were randomized to receive either a robotic (robotic group) or conventional laparoscopic hysterectomy (conventional group). The primary end point was total operating time; secondary end points were perioperative outcome, blood loss, and the change in quality of life. RESULTS: Ninety-five patients out of 100 randomized patients completed the study. Patient age, body mass index, and uterus weight showed no significant differences between both groups. All results are given as mean (+/- standard deviation; median). Total operating time for the robotic group was significantly higher with 106 (+/- 29; 103) compared with 75 (+/- 21; 74) (conventional group) minutes. Blood loss, complications, analgesics use, and return to activity for both groups were comparable. The change in preoperative to postoperative quality-of-life index (quality of life measured on a linear scale from 0 to 100) was significantly higher in the robotic group, with 13 (+/- 10; 13) compared with 5 (+/- 14; 5) (conventional group). CONCLUSION: Robot-assisted laparoscopic hysterectomy and conventional laparoscopy compare well in most surgical aspects, but the robotic procedure is associated with longer operating times. Postoperative quality-of-life index was better; however, long-term, there was no difference. However, subjective postoperative parameters such as analgesic use and return to activity showed no significant difference between both groups. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, www.clinicaltrials.gov, NCT00683293. (Obstet Gynecol 2012; 120: 604-11) DOI: http://10.1097/AOG.0b013e318265b61a LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: I
引用
收藏
页码:604 / 611
页数:8
相关论文
共 29 条
[1]   The role of robotic surgery in gynecology [J].
Advincula, Arnold P. ;
Song, Arleen .
CURRENT OPINION IN OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY, 2007, 19 (04) :331-336
[2]   Evolving Role and Current State of Robotics in Minimally Invasive Gynecologic Surgery [J].
Advincula, Arnold P. ;
Wang, Karen .
JOURNAL OF MINIMALLY INVASIVE GYNECOLOGY, 2009, 16 (03) :291-301
[3]  
[Anonymous], 2011, R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing
[4]  
[Anonymous], 1993, Gynaecol Endosc
[5]   Perioperative Outcomes of Robotically Assisted Hysterectomy for Benign Cases With Complex Pathology [J].
Boggess, John F. ;
Gehrig, Paola A. ;
Cantrell, Leigh ;
Shafer, Aaron ;
Mendivil, Alberto ;
Rossi, Emma ;
Hanna, Rabbie .
OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY, 2009, 114 (03) :585-593
[6]   EuroQol: The current state of play [J].
Brooks, R .
HEALTH POLICY, 1996, 37 (01) :53-72
[7]   Laparoscopic versus vaginal hysterectomy for benign pathology [J].
Candiani, Massimo ;
Izzo, Stefano .
CURRENT OPINION IN OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY, 2010, 22 (04) :304-308
[8]  
Cho J E, 2010, Minerva Ginecol, V62, P137
[9]   Robotically assisted laparoscopic hysterectomy versus total abdominal hysterectomy and lymphadenectomy for endometrial cancer [J].
DeNardis, Sara A. ;
Holloway, Robert W. ;
Bigsby, Glenn E. ;
Pikaart, Dirk P. ;
Ahmad, Sarfraz ;
Finkler, Neil J. .
GYNECOLOGIC ONCOLOGY, 2008, 111 (03) :412-417
[10]   Laparoscopic hysterectomy using a computer-enhanced surgical robot [J].
Diaz-Arrastia, C ;
Jurnalov, C ;
Gomez, G ;
Townsend, C .
SURGICAL ENDOSCOPY AND OTHER INTERVENTIONAL TECHNIQUES, 2002, 16 (09) :1271-1273