Perioperative Outcomes of Robotic Assisted Laparoscopic Surgery Versus Conventional Laparoscopy Surgery for Advanced-Stage Endometriosis

被引:42
作者
Nezhat, Farr R. [1 ,2 ]
Sirota, Ido [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] Mt Sinai Roosevelt, Dept Obstet & Gynecol, New York, NY 10019 USA
[2] Mt Sinai St Lukes, New York, NY 10019 USA
关键词
Conventional versus robotic-assisted laparoscopic surgery; Advanced-stage endometriosis; Conventional laparoscopic surgery; Robotic-assisted laparoscopic surgery; Endometriosis stage III; Endometriosis stage IV; BLADDER; HYSTERECTOMY; PAIN;
D O I
10.4293/JSLS.2014.00094
中图分类号
R61 [外科手术学];
学科分类号
摘要
Background and Objectives: To determine perioperative outcome differences in patients undergoing robotic-assisted laparoscopic surgery (RALS) versus conventional laparoscopic surgery (CLS) for advanced-stage endometriosis. Methods: This retrospective cohort study at a minimally invasive gynecologic surgery center at 2 academically affiliated, urban, nonprofit hospitals included all patients treated by either robotic-assisted or conventional laparoscopic surgery for stage III or IV endometriosis (American Society for Reproductive Medicine criteria) between July 2009 and October 2012 by 1 surgeon experienced in both techniques. The main outcome measures were extent of surgery, estimated blood loss, operating room time, intraoperative and postoperative complications, and length of stay, with medians for continuous measures and distributions for categorical measures, stratified by body mass index values. Robotically assisted laparoscopy and conventional laparoscopy were then compared by use of the Wilcoxon rank sum, chi(2), or Fisher exact test, as appropriate. Results: Among 86 conventional laparoscopic and 32 robotically assisted cases, the latter had a higher body mass index (27.36 kg/m(2) [range, 23.90 -34.09 kg/m(2)] versus 24.53 kg/m(2) [range, 22.27-26.96 kg/m(2)]; P < .0079) and operating room time (250.50 minutes [range, 176-328.50 minutes] versus 173.50 minutes [range, 123-237 minutes]; P < .0005) than did conventional laparoscopy patients. After body mass index stratification, obese patients varied in operating room time (282.5 minutes [range, 224-342 minutes] for robotic-assisted laparoscopy versus 174 minutes [range, 130-270 minutes] for conventional laparoscopy; P < .05). No other significant differences were noted between the robotic-assisted and conventional laparoscopy groups. Conclusion: Despite a higher operating room time, robotic-assisted laparoscopy appears to be a safe minimally invasive approach for patients, with all other perioperative outcomes, including intraoperative and postoperative complications, comparable with those in patients undergoing conventional laparoscopy.
引用
收藏
页数:7
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Robotic-assisted laparoscopic surgery in uterine pathology
    Saceanu, Sidonia-Maria
    Cela, Vito
    Pluchino, Nicola
    Angelescu, Cristina
    Surlin, Valeriu
    Genazzani, Andrea
    [J]. EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY AND REPRODUCTIVE BIOLOGY, 2013, 169 (02) : 340 - 342
  • [22] Learning Experiences in Robotic-Assisted Laparoscopic Surgery
    Nezhat, Ceana
    Lakhi, Nisha
    [J]. BEST PRACTICE & RESEARCH CLINICAL OBSTETRICS & GYNAECOLOGY, 2016, 35 : 20 - 29
  • [23] Trends and survival outcomes of robotic, laparoscopic, and open surgery for stage II uterine cancer
    Abel, Mary Kathryn
    Chan, John K.
    Chow, Stephanie
    Darcy, Kathleen
    Tian, Chunqiao
    Kapp, Daniel S.
    Mann, Amandeep K.
    Liao, Cheng-, I
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF GYNECOLOGICAL CANCER, 2020, 30 (09) : 1347 - 1355
  • [24] Robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery versus conventional laparoscopic surgery in randomized controlled trials: A systematic review and meta-analysis
    Roh, Hyunsuk Frank
    Nam, Seung Hyuk
    Kim, Jung Mogg
    [J]. PLOS ONE, 2018, 13 (01):
  • [25] Survival outcomes of robotic-assisted laparoscopy versus conventional laparoscopy and laparotomy for endometrial cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis
    Fu, Hanlin
    Zhang, Jiahui
    Zhao, Shiyi
    He, Nannan
    [J]. GYNECOLOGIC ONCOLOGY, 2023, 174 : 55 - 67
  • [26] Perceptions and experiences of perioperative nurses and nurse anaesthetists in robotic-assisted surgery
    Schuessler, Zohreh
    Scott Stiles, Anne
    Mancuso, Peggy
    [J]. JOURNAL OF CLINICAL NURSING, 2020, 29 (1-2) : 60 - 74
  • [27] Robotic-assisted Gynecological Surgery in Older Patients - a Comparative Cohort Study of Perioperative Outcomes
    Mothes, Anke R.
    Kather, Angela
    Cepraga, Irina
    Esber, Anke
    Kwetkat, Anja
    Runnebaum, Ingo B.
    [J]. GEBURTSHILFE UND FRAUENHEILKUNDE, 2023, 83 (04) : 437 - 445
  • [28] Long-term outcomes of robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery versus conventional laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer: single-center, retrospective, propensity score analyses
    Mazaki, Junichi
    Ishizaki, Tetsuo
    Kuboyama, Yu
    Udo, Ryutaro
    Tago, Tomoya
    Kasahara, Kenta
    Yamada, Tesshi
    Nagakawa, Yuichi
    [J]. JOURNAL OF ROBOTIC SURGERY, 2024, 18 (01)
  • [29] Robot-assisted laparoscopy does not have demonstrable advantages over conventional laparoscopy in endometriosis surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis
    Csirzo, Adam
    Kovacs, Denes Peter
    Szabo, Anett
    Fehervari, Peter
    Janko, Arpad
    Hegyi, Peter
    Nyirady, Peter
    Sipos, Zoltan
    Sara, Levente
    Acs, Nandor
    Szabo, Istvan
    Valent, Sandor
    [J]. SURGICAL ENDOSCOPY AND OTHER INTERVENTIONAL TECHNIQUES, 2024, 38 (02): : 799 - 812
  • [30] Safety and perioperative outcomes of uniportal versus multiportal video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery
    Alanwar, Mohamed
    Elsharawy, Mamdouh
    Brik, Alaa
    Ahmady, Islam
    Shemais, Dina Said
    [J]. JOURNAL OF MINIMAL ACCESS SURGERY, 2024, 20 (03) : 294 - 300