Robotic versus standard laparoscopy for the treatment of endometriosis

被引:97
作者
Nezhat, Camran [1 ]
Lewis, Michael [1 ]
Kotikela, Sumathi [1 ]
Veeraswamy, Arathi [1 ]
Saadat, Lily [1 ]
Hajhosseini, Babak [1 ]
Nezhat, Ceana [2 ]
机构
[1] Stanford Univ, Ctr Minimally Invas & Robot Surg, Palo Alto, CA 94304 USA
[2] Atlanta Ctr Minimally Invas Surg & Reprod Med, Atlanta, GA USA
关键词
Endometriosis; robotic surgery; laparoscopy; robotic-assisted laparoscopy; minimally invasive surgery; keyhole surgery; MICROSURGICAL TUBAL ANASTOMOSIS; GYNECOLOGIC ONCOLOGY; SURGERY; EXPERIENCE; HYSTERECTOMY;
D O I
10.1016/j.fertnstert.2010.04.031
中图分类号
R71 [妇产科学];
学科分类号
100211 ;
摘要
Objective: To compare robot assisted laparoscopic platform to standard laparoscopy for the treatment of endometriosis. Design: A retrospective cohort controlled study. Setting: Tertiary referral center. Patient(s): Seventy-eight reproductive aged women. Intervention(s): Robot assisted or standard laparoscopy for the treatment of endometriosis between January 2008 and January 2009. Main Outcome Measure(s): Operative time, estimated blood loss, hospitalization time, intraoperative and postoperative complications. Result(s): Seventy-eight patients underwent treatment of endometriosis, 40 by robot assisted laparoscopy and 38 by standard laparoscopy. The two groups were matched for age, body mass index (BMI), stage of endometriosis, and previous abdominal surgery. Mean operative time with the robot was 191 minutes (range 135-295 minutes) compared with 159 minutes (range 85-320 minutes) during standard laparoscopy. There were no significant differences in blood loss, hospitalization, intraoperative or postoperative complications. There were no conversions to laparotomy. Conclusion(s): Both robot assisted laparoscopic and standard laparoscopic treatment of endometriosis have excellent outcomes. The robotic technique required significantly longer surgical and anesthesia time, as well as larger trocars. (Fertil Steril (R) 2010; 94:2758-60. (C) 2010 by American Society for Reproductive Medicine.)
引用
收藏
页码:2758 / 2760
页数:3
相关论文
共 24 条
  • [1] Bargar WL, 1998, CLIN ORTHOP RELAT R, P82
  • [2] Early experience with robotic technology for coronary artery surgery
    Boehm, DH
    Reichenspurner, H
    Gulbins, H
    Detter, C
    Meiser, B
    Brenner, F
    Habazettl, H
    Reichart, B
    [J]. ANNALS OF THORACIC SURGERY, 1999, 68 (04) : 1542 - 1546
  • [3] Robotics and Gynecologic Oncology: Review of the Literature
    Cho, Jennifer E.
    Nezhat, Farr R.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF MINIMALLY INVASIVE GYNECOLOGY, 2009, 16 (06) : 669 - 681
  • [4] Robotically assisted laparoscopic microsurgical tubal reanastomosis:: a feasibility study
    Degueldre, M
    Vandromme, J
    Huong, PT
    Cadière, GB
    [J]. FERTILITY AND STERILITY, 2000, 74 (05) : 1020 - 1023
  • [5] Current status of robotics in female urology and gynecology
    Elliott, DS
    Chow, GK
    Gettman, M
    [J]. WORLD JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2006, 24 (02) : 188 - 192
  • [6] Robotics in gynecology
    Falcone, T
    Goldberg, JM
    [J]. SURGICAL CLINICS OF NORTH AMERICA, 2003, 83 (06) : 1483 - +
  • [7] Robotic-assisted laparoscopic microsurgical tubal anastomosis: a human pilot study
    Falcone, T
    Goldberg, JM
    Margossian, H
    Stevens, L
    [J]. FERTILITY AND STERILITY, 2000, 73 (05) : 1040 - 1042
  • [8] Computer-enhanced robotic surgery in gynecologic oncology
    Field, Jayson B.
    Benoit, Michelle F.
    Dinh, Tri A.
    Diaz-Arrastia, Concepcion
    [J]. SURGICAL ENDOSCOPY AND OTHER INTERVENTIONAL TECHNIQUES, 2007, 21 (02): : 244 - 246
  • [9] Frick A C, 2009, Minerva Ginecol, V61, P187
  • [10] Laparoscopic microsurgical tubal anastomosis with and without robotic assistance
    Goldberg, JM
    Falcone, T
    [J]. HUMAN REPRODUCTION, 2003, 18 (01) : 145 - 147