Robotic Hysterectomy for Benign Indications: What Have We Learned from a Decade?

被引:15
|
作者
Carbonnel, Marie [1 ]
MoawP, Gaby N. [2 ]
Tarazi, Mia Maria [1 ]
Revaux, Irene [1 ]
Kennel, Titouan [3 ]
Favre-Inhuter, Angeline [1 ]
Ayoubi, Jean Marc [1 ]
机构
[1] Paris Ouest UVSQ, Foch Hosp, Fac Med, Dept Obstet & Gynecol, Suresnes, France
[2] George Washington Univ, Sch Med & Hlth Sci, Dept Obstet & Gynecol, 2150 Penn Ave NW,Ste 6A429, Washington, DC 20037 USA
[3] Foch Hosp, Dept Clin Res, Suresnes, France
关键词
Hysterectomy; Robotic-assisted; Benign; Laparoscopy; Minimally invasive; LAPAROSCOPIC HYSTERECTOMY; CURVE; COST;
D O I
10.4293/JSLS.2020.00091
中图分类号
R61 [外科手术学];
学科分类号
摘要
Background and Objectives: Robotic surgery data need a setback on many years of practice with high-volume surgeons to evaluate its real value. Our main objective was to study the impact of a decade of robotic surgery on minimally-invasive hysterectomies for benign indications. Our secondary objectives were to evaluate our results for high-volume surgeons and complex cases. Methods: In this retrospective cohort study, we reviewed medical records at Foch Hospital, from 2010 to 2019, to evaluate the outcomes of robotic hysterectomies for benign disease. We compared the trends of benign hysterectomies done by laparoscopy and laparotomy during this period. We analyzed the proficiency group (>= 75 cases per surgeon) and complex cases including obese patients and large uteri (>250 g). Results: 495 hysterectomies were performed by robotic, 275 by laparotomy, and 130 by laparoscopy. The laparotomy approach decreased from 62% to 29%, whereas the robotic approach increased from 26% to 61%. The operating room (OR) time decreased in the proficiency group (157.3 +/- 43.32 versus 178.6 +/- 48.05, P = 0.005); whereas the uterine weight was higher (194.6 +/- 158.6 versus 161.3 +/- 139.4, P = 0.04). Lower EBL and shorter OR time were seen with uteri = 250 g subgroup (64.24 +/- 110.2 ml versus 116.63 +/- 146.98 ml, P = 0.0004) (169.62 +/- 47.50 min versus 192.44 +/- 45.82 min, P = 0.0001). The estimated blood loss (EBL) was less in the BMI = 30 subgroup (68.83 +/- 119.24 ml versus 124.53 +/- 186.14 ml, P = 0.0005). Conclusion: A shift was observed between the laparotomy and robotic approaches. High-volume surgeons were more efficient and showed a decrease in OR time after 75 cases despite an increase in uterine weight.
引用
收藏
页数:12
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] What Have We Learned From Antibiotics?
    Smith, James Leif
    CURRENT PHARMACEUTICAL BIOTECHNOLOGY, 2011, 12 (08) : 1183 - 1183
  • [42] What We Have Learned from Helioseismology
    Michael J. Thompson
    Astrophysics and Space Science, 1998, 261 : 23 - 34
  • [43] What we have learned from helioseismology
    Thompson, MJ
    ASTROPHYSICS AND SPACE SCIENCE, 1998, 261 (1-4) : 23 - 34
  • [44] Proteomics and diabetic nephropathy: what have we learned from a decade of clinical proteomics studies?
    Papale, Massimo
    Di Paolo, Salvatore
    Vocino, Grazia
    Rocchetti, Maria Teresa
    Gesualdo, Loreto
    JOURNAL OF NEPHROLOGY, 2014, 27 (03) : 221 - 228
  • [45] What have we learned from OpenReview?
    Wang, Gang
    Peng, Qi
    Zhang, Yanfeng
    Zhang, Mingyang
    WORLD WIDE WEB-INTERNET AND WEB INFORMATION SYSTEMS, 2023, 26 (02): : 683 - 708
  • [46] WHAT WE HAVE LEARNED FROM CHERNOBYL
    LUSHBAUGH, CC
    DISCHER, DP
    WESTERN JOURNAL OF MEDICINE, 1988, 148 (01): : 76 - 77
  • [47] Proteomics and diabetic nephropathy: what have we learned from a decade of clinical proteomics studies?
    Massimo Papale
    Salvatore Di Paolo
    Grazia Vocino
    Maria Teresa Rocchetti
    Loreto Gesualdo
    Journal of Nephrology, 2014, 27 : 221 - 228
  • [48] What have we learned from BeSt?
    Allaart, Cornelia F.
    Markusse, Iris M.
    Lems, Willem F.
    CLINICAL IMMUNOLOGY, 2018, 186 : 74 - 78
  • [49] What have we learned from SHIVA?
    Le Tourneau, Christophe
    Kurzrock, Razelle
    NATURE REVIEWS CLINICAL ONCOLOGY, 2016, 13 (12) : 719 - 720
  • [50] What have we learned from nonimmobilizers?
    Eger, EI
    MOLECULAR AND BASIC MECHANISMS OF ANESTHESIA, 2002, : 58 - 60