Robot-Assisted Laparoscopic Myomectomy: A Four Year Outcomes Analysis

A.H. Song,X. Xu,S. As-Sanie,K. Wang,S. Senapati,A.P. Advincula

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmig.2008.09.228

IF: 4.314

2008-01-01

Journal of Minimally Invasive Gynecology

Abstract:Study Objective: To evaluate change in symptom severity and health related quality of life in patients who have had robot-assisted laparoscopic myomectomy.

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

Robot-assisted Versus Laparoscopic Surgery for Rectal Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Xiaowei Wang,Gaoyang Cao,Weifang Mao,Weifeng Lao,Chao He

DOI: https://doi.org/10.4103/jcrt.jcrt_533_18

2020-01-01

Abstract:This study aimed to compare clinical and oncological outcomes of robot-assisted and laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer.We searched PubMed/Medline, Embase, the Cochrane Library, Yahoo, and Google Scholar databases for relevant articles published up to 2017. Studies based on comparability between robot-assisted and laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer were designated. Clinical outcomes included operative time, conversion to open surgery, estimated blood loss (EBL), bowel function recovery time, length of hospital stay (LOS), anastomosis leak, and postoperative complications. Oncological outcomes comprised the number of lymph nodes extracted, the positive circumferential margin (PCRM), and the distal resection margin (DRM).Twenty studies were designated totaling 5496 patients, comprising a robot-assisted surgery patient group (n = 2168, 39.4%) and a laparoscopic surgery patient group (n = 3328, 60.6%). The robot-assisted surgery group was associated with longer operative time (odds ratio [OR] 0.48, 95% confidence interval [CI]; 0.14, 0.82), lower conversion to open surgery rate (OR 0.55, 95% CI; 0.44, 0.69), shorter LOS (OR - 0.15, 95% CI; -0.30, 0.00), faster bowel function recovery (OR - 0.38, 95% CI; -0.74, -0.02), and lower postoperative complications (OR 0.79, 95% CI; 0.65, 0.97). EBL, anastomosis leak rate, and oncological outcomes including the number of lymph nodes extracted, the DRM, and the PCRM showed no significant differences between groups.Robot-assisted surgery for rectal cancer showed longer operative time, lower conversion, faster bowel function recovery rates, and shorter hospital stay, and similar oncological outcomes compared to laparoscopic surgery.
Efficacy and safety of robot-assisted laparoscopic myomectomy versus laparoscopic myomectomy: a systematic evaluation and meta-analysis

Yannan Sheng,Ziqiang Hong,Jian Wang,Baohong Mao,Zhenzhen Wu,Yunjiu Gou,Jing Zhao,Qing Liu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12957-023-03104-8

2023-07-28

Abstract:Objective: Systematic evaluation of the efficacy and safety of robotic-assisted laparoscopic myomectomy (RALM) versus laparoscopic myomectomy (LM). Methods: PubMed, Embase, The Cochrane Library, and Web of Science database were searched by computer to seek relevant literature in order to compare the efficacy and safety of RALM with that of LM from the establishment of the databases to January 2023, and Review Manager 5.4 software was utilized to perform a meta-analysis on the literature. Results: A total of 15 retrospective clinical controlled studies were included. There exists a total of 45,702 patients, among 11,618 patients in the RALM group and the remaining 34,084 patients in the LM group. Meta-analysis results revealed that RALM was associated with lesser intraoperative bleeding (MD = - 32.03, 95%CI - 57.24 to - 6.83, P = 0.01), lower incidence of blood transfusions (OR = 0.86, 95%CI 0.77 to 0.97, P = 0.01), shorter postoperative hospital stay (MD = - 0.11, 95%CI - 0.21 to - 0.01, P = 0.03), fewer transitions to open stomach (OR = 0.82, 95%CI 0.73 to 0.92, P = 0.0006), and lower incidence of postoperative complications (OR = 0.58, 95%CI 0.40 to 0.86, P = 0.006) than LM, whereas LM is more advantageous in terms of operative time (MD = 38.61, 95%CI 19.36 to 57.86, P < 0.0001). There was no statistical difference between the two surgical methods in terms of maximum myoma diameter (MD = 0.26, 95%CI - 0.17 to 0.70, P = 0.24). Conclusion: In the aspects of intraoperative bleeding, lower incidence of blood transfusions, postoperative hospital stay, transit open stomach rate, and postoperative complications, RALM has a unique advantage than that of LM, while LM has advantages over RALM in terms of operative time.
Robotic‐assisted laparoscopic versus abdominal and laparoscopic myomectomy: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

Weiqi Chen,Jun Ma,Zhao Yang,Xiao Han,Chenyang Hu,Huai Wang,Ying Peng,Lei Zhang,Bin Jiang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/ijgo.15485

2024-04-10

International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics

Abstract:Background Myomectomy is the preferred treatment for women with uterine fibroids and fertility requirements. There are three modalities are used in clinical practice for myomectomy: abdominal myomectomy (AM), laparoscopic myomectomy (LM), and robot‐assisted laparoscopic myomectomy (RLM). Objectives To compare the perioperative and postoperative outcomes of RLM, AM, and LM. Search Strategy We searched PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and Clinical Trials for relevant literature published between January 2000 and January 2023. Selection Criteria We included all studies reporting peri‐ and postoperative outcomes of myomectomy in patients with uterine myomas. Surgical treatments were classified as RLM, LM, or AM. Data Collection and Analysis Two or more authors selected studies independently, assessed risk of bias, and extracted data. We derived mean difference (MD) or odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for each outcome, subgrouping trials by the patient characteristics and myoma characteristics. We used the I2 statistic to quantify heterogeneity and the random‐effects model for meta‐analysis when appropriate. We used the funnel plot to assess the publication bias. Main Results A total of 32 studies with 6357 patients were included, of which 1982 women had undergone RLM. The operating time was significantly longer (MD = 43.58, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 25.22–61.93, P

obstetrics & gynecology
Long-term clinical outcomes of total mesorectal excision and selective lateral pelvic lymph node dissection for advanced low rectal cancer: a comparative study of a robotic versus laparoscopic approach

S. H. Song,G.-S. Choi,H. J. Kim,J. S. Park,S. Y. Park,S.-M. Lee,J. A. Choi,H. A. Seok

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10151-020-02383-7

2021-02-16

Techniques in Coloproctology

Abstract:The long-term outcomes of minimally invasive lateral pelvic lymph node dissection (LPND) are not completely known. The aim of this study was to compare long-term outcomes between robotic and laparoscopic LPND in low rectal cancer patients with suspected lymph node metastasis in the pelvic sidewall.

gastroenterology & hepatology,surgery
Clinical Outcomes of Robotic Surgery Compared to Conventional Surgical Approaches (Laparoscopic or Open)

Hala Muaddi,Melanie El Hafid,Woo Jin Choi,Erin Lillie,Charles de Mestral,Avery Nathens,Therese A Stukel,Paul J Karanicolas,Therese A. Stukel,Paul J. Karanicolas

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/sla.0000000000003915

IF: 13.787

2020-05-08

Annals of Surgery

Abstract:OBJECTIVE: Describe clinical outcomes (eg, postoperative complications, survival) after robotic surgery compared to open or laparoscopic surgery.BACKGROUND: Robotic surgery utilization has increased over the years across a wide range of surgical procedures. However, evidence supporting improved clinical outcomes after robotic surgery is limited.METHODS: We systematically searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of systematic reviews from inception to January 2019 for systematic reviews describing postoperative outcomes after robotic surgery. We qualitatively described patient outcomes of commonly performed robotic procedures: radical prostatectomy, hysterectomy, lobectomy, thymectomy, rectal resection, partial nephrectomy, distal gastrectomy, Roux-en-Y gastric bypass, hepatectomy, distal pancreatectomy, and cholecystectomy.RESULTS: One hundred fifty-four systematic reviews included 336 studies and 18 randomized controlled trials reporting on patient outcomes after robotic compared to laparoscopic or open procedures. Data from the randomized controlled trials demonstrate that robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy offered fewer biochemical recurrence and improvement in quality of recovery and pain scores only up to 6 weeks postoperatively compared to open radical prostatectomy. When compared to laparoscopic prostatectomy, robotic surgery offered improved urinary and sexual functions. Robotic surgery for endometrial cancer had fewer conversion to open compared to laparoscopic. Otherwise, robotic surgery outcomes were similar to conventional surgical approaches for other procedures except for radical hysterectomy where minimally invasive approaches may result in patient harm compared to open approach.CONCLUSION: Robotic surgery has been widely incorporated into practise despite limited supporting evidence. More rigorous research focused on patient-important benefits is needed before further expansion of robotic surgery.

surgery
Robotic Partial Nephrectomy: Current Technique and Outcomes

Liang Wang,Benjamin R Lee

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/iju.12177

2013-01-01

International Journal of Urology

Abstract:AbstractOver the past decade, management of the T1 renal mass has focused on nephron‐sparing surgery. Robotic partial nephrectomy has played an increasing role in the technique of preserving renal function by decreasing warm ischemia time, as well as optimizing outcomes of hemorrhage and fistula. Robot‐assisted partial nephrectomy is designed to provide a minimally‐invasive nephron‐sparing surgical option utilizing reconstructive capability, decreasing intracorporeal suturing time, technical feasibility and safety. Ultimately, its benefits are resulting in its dissemination across institutions. Articulated instrumentation and three‐dimensional vision facilitate resection, collecting system reconstruction and renorrhaphy, leading to decreased warm ischemia time while preserving oncological outcomes. The aim of the present review was to present our surgical sequence and technique, as well as review the current status of robot‐assisted partial nephrectomy.
Oncologic and Perioperative Outcomes of Robot-Assisted Versus Conventional Laparoscopy for the Treatment of Clinically Uterine-Confined High-Grade Adenocarcinoma

Christian Dagher,Yu Hui Lim,Yukio Sonoda,Lila Marshall,Kara Long Roche,Elizabeth Jewell,Dennis S Chi,Ginger Gardner,Vance Broach,Jennifer J Mueller,Nadeem R Abu-Rustum,Mario M Leitao Jr

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-024-16029-7

Abstract:Objective: The aim of this study was to compare oncologic and perioperative outcomes of robot-assisted laparoscopy (RA) and conventional laparoscopy (LSC) in apparent clinically uterine-confined, high-grade adenocarcinoma. Methods: A retrospective review was conducted to identify patients with newly diagnosed high-grade uterine adenocarcinoma treated at our institution between 1 January 2009 and 30 June 2021. Exclusion criteria included bulky extrauterine disease, no lymph node assessment, or synchronous tumors. Clinicopathologic details were obtained from medical records. Postoperative complications were classified using the Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center Surgical Secondary Events system, and statistical analysis was performed using appropriate tests. Results: Of 901 patients identified, 748 (83%) underwent RA and 153 (17%) underwent LSC. Median age was 65 years (range 25-92) and median body mass index was 30 kg/m2 (range 15-60). Overall, 650 patients (72%) had 2009 International Federation of Obstetrics and Gynecology (FIGO) stage I disease. Forty-one patients (4.6%) converted to laparotomy-26 (3.5%) from RA versus 15 (9.8%) from LSC (p = 0.02). Postoperative complications occurred in 81 patients (9.0%), with no significant differences in type or rate between groups. Median operative time was 192 mins (range 88-936) for RA versus 168 mins (range 90-372) for LSC (p = 0.002). Median follow-up was 52 months (range 1-163) for RA and 66 months (range 7-165) for LSC. Four-year progression-free survival (PFS) and disease-specific survival (DSS) were similar between groups. Multivariate analysis showed stage, histology, peritoneal cytology, and lymphovascular invasion predicated a decrease in PFS and DSS. Conclusions: RA demonstrated comparable oncologic outcomes to LSC in patients with high-grade endometrial carcinoma, with no significant difference in postoperative complications or long-term survival.
Long-Term Outcomes of Robot-Assisted Surgery in Patients with Colorectal Cancer

Ismail Pinar,Tina Fransgaard,Lau C. Thygesen,Ismail Gögenur

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-018-6862-2

IF: 4.339

2018-10-11

Annals of Surgical Oncology

Abstract:<h3 class="a-plus-plus">Abstract</h3> <span class="a-plus-plus abstract-section id-a-sec1"> <h3 class="a-plus-plus">Background</h3> <p class="a-plus-plus">Robotic technology has been proven to be a safe alternative to conventional laparoscopy with regards to the peri- and postoperative clinical outcomes. Oncological outcomes have been scarcely examined. The purpose of this study was to examine the disease-free survival in relation to the two surgical approaches: robot-assisted surgery and conventional laparoscopy. In addition, all-cause mortality and recurrence-free survival were investigated.</p> </span> <span class="a-plus-plus abstract-section id-a-sec2"> <h3 class="a-plus-plus">Methods</h3> <p class="a-plus-plus">Between January 2010 and December 2015, patients, undergoing either laparoscopic or robot-assisted elective, curative-intended surgery for colorectal cancer were included.</p> </span> <span class="a-plus-plus abstract-section id-a-sec3"> <h3 class="a-plus-plus">Results</h3> <p class="a-plus-plus">A total of 9184 patients underwent surgery in the study period: 5978 patients for colon cancer and 3206 patients for rectal cancer. Among patients with colon cancer, 331 patients (5.5%) underwent robot-assisted surgery, and 449 patients (14.0%) underwent robot-assisted surgery in the rectal cancer group. In the adjusted analyses, the hazard ratio (HR) for disease-free survival, for patients with colon cancer was 0.91 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.71–1.18]. For patients with rectal cancer, the adjusted HR was 0.83 (95% CI 0.65–1.06). No difference in all-cause mortality and recurrence-free survival were observed.</p> </span> <span class="a-plus-plus abstract-section id-a-sec4"> <h3 class="a-plus-plus">Conclusions</h3> <p class="a-plus-plus">The study demonstrated comparable rates of disease-free survival, all-cause mortality, and recurrence-free survival when comparing robot-assisted surgery with conventional laparoscopy in patients with colorectal cancer.</p> </span>

oncology,surgery
Myomectomy with ArtiSential fully articulating laparoscopic instruments: A prospective multicenter study

Seyeon Won,Kidong Kim,Keun Ho Lee,Tae‐Joong Kim,Taehun Kim,Jong Ha Hwang,Hyun Park,Min Kyu Kim,Dae Gy Hong,Yong Jung Song,Seok Ju Seong

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/ijgo.15420

2024-02-17

International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics

Abstract:Background ArtiSential, a class of innovative laparoscopic instrument, has been developed to overcome the limitations of conventional laparoscopic surgery by enabling free, 360°‐unrestricted movement of the wrist joint, as in robotic surgery. Objective The aim of the present study was to describe the initial experiences with these devices in myomectomy and to report the surgical outcomes. Methods A total of 77 women undergoing laparoscopic or robotic myomectomy between January 2021 and June 2022 were included in this multicenter prospective study. The ArtiSential instruments used by the surgeons were those chosen according to their respective preferences. The baseline characteristics, surgical outcomes, trocar placement options, and operator survey results were scrutinized. Results The mean age of the patients was 39.9 ± 6.3, and the mean body mass index (BMI, calculated as weight in kilograms divided by the square of height in meters) was 22.4 ± 3.4 kg/m2; 46.8% of the patients underwent robotic surgery, while 53.2% underwent laparoscopic surgery. The number of removed myomas was 3.3 ± 3.0, the size of the largest myoma was 7.1 ± 2.3 cm, and the operative time was 130.0 ± 54.0 min. No transfusions or laparotomy conversions were required. Other than one case of ileus, there were no postoperative complications. In most cases, the instruments were inserted through the umbilicus trocar, and the fenestrated forceps, needle holder, and bipolar fenestrated forceps, in that order, were frequently employed. According to a surgeon survey, 29.9% moderately or strongly agreed that the ArtiSential devices utilized were more convenient than conventional laparoscopic instruments, while only 9.7% moderately or strongly agreed that they were more convenient than robotic instruments. Conclusions Myomectomy as performed with an ArtiSential instrument seems to be feasible and safe. Further studies are necessary in order to comparatively assess the outcomes and potential benefits of ArtiSential, robotic, and conventional laparoscopic myomectomy.

obstetrics & gynecology
A comparative retrospective analysis on robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery compared to conventional laparoscopy in case of myomectomy: experience in a third-level hospital of Southern Italy

Luigi Della Corte,Giuseppe D’Angelo,Mario Ascione,Marcello Granata,Pierluigi Giampaolino,Attilio Di Spiezio Sardo,Giuseppe Bifulco

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13304-024-01863-x

2024-05-02

Updates in Surgery

Abstract:Uterine myomas are the most common gynecological disease in reproductive-aged women, present several symptoms, and require effective medical and/or surgical strategies. This study aimed to compare robotic-assisted laparoscopic myomectomy (RALM) with laparoscopic myomectomy (LM) in terms of operative times, intraoperative estimated blood loss, pre- and post-hemoglobin levels drop, and length of hospital stay. Data from 50 clinical records (25 RALM in Group A and 25 LM in Group B) of patients with uterine fibroids were collected from December 2022 to December 2023 at Gynecological Unit of DAI Materno-Infantile Federico II in Naples, Italy. Patients aged 30–49 years with symptomatic fibroids were included. Data on peri-operative outcomes, including operative time for myomectomy (OTM), overall operative time (OOT), intraoperative estimated blood loss (EBL), pre- and post-operative hemoglobin levels, and length of hospital stay were analyzed. The OTM in the presence of > 5 myomas was 59 [52–65] vs 69 min [61–96] ( p < 0.001) for RALM and LM groups, respectively. Moreover, also in presence of ≤ 5 myomas, a difference was observed in the RALM group 48[43–55] compared to the LM group 53[50–61] min ( p = 0.07). The OOT was also statistically significant for Group A compared to Group B (83[65–93] vs 72[56–110] min, p < 0.001). There were no significant differences between the two groups in terms of pre- and post-operative hemoglobin levels and EBL ( p = 0.178). Group A demonstrated a notably shorter hospital stay 1.2 [1–2] days compared to Group B 2.9[3–3.75] days ( p = 0.007). Our study suggests potential advantages of RALM over LM in terms of reduced operative times and shorter hospital stays. The standardized approach and extensive surgical experience likely contributed to the favorable outcomes of RALM.

surgery
Single-Site Robotic Myomectomy without Accessory Instrument Compared with Two-Port Laparoscopic Myomectomy: A Propensity Score Matching Analysis

Ji-Hye Kim,Eun-Ju Lee

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1159/000523812

Abstract:Objectives: Despite the advantages of robotic technology, single-site robotic myomectomy (SSRM) without an accessory instrument is limited by a restricted range of motion, weaker suturing of a thick myometrium, and non-articulating instruments. We present our novel gradual turning out method (GTOM) of SSRM and our assessment of its feasibility and safety by comparing its perioperative outcomes with those of two-port laparoscopic myomectomy (LM). Design: A retrospective cohort case-control study was carried out. Methods: This study included consecutive 46 patients who underwent SSRM for intramural myomas larger than 7 cm, from 2016 to 2019. Subsequently, 46 patients who underwent LM were selected by 1:1 propensity score matching by controlling for age, body mass index, myoma number, myoma diameter, and the presence of sexual intercourse. The perioperative outcomes of the two groups were compared using a Mann-Whitney U test and Fisher's exact test. The effect of covariates on operation time was analyzed using univariable and multivariable linear regression. Results: SSRM was performed successfully with GTOM for myomas of up to 14 cm in the longest diameter, without conversion to laparotomy and intraoperative injuries. No differences between the groups were found in length of hospital stay, estimated blood loss, hemoglobin level decrease, transfusion rate, and postoperative pain, but operative time was significantly longer in the SSRM group than in the LM group (p < 0.001). Larger myomas, location of the lower segment, and the operation method of SSRM were significantly associated with a longer operation time. Whereas operation time for myomas located at the anterior wall, singleton myomas, and myomas <10 cm was significantly longer in the SSRM group than in the LM group, that for myomas at the posterior or lateral side of the uterus, multiple myomas, and myomas ≥10 cm did not differ significantly between the groups, indicating the advantage of SSRM for difficult myomectomy. Limitations: Retrospective nature of the study and limitation to a single-center study are the limitations of the study. Conclusions: Despite the lack of an accessory instrument, SSRM using the GOTM was feasible and safe as it yielded similar perioperative outcomes to those of LM.
Robot-Assisted Laparoscopic Myomectomy versus Abdominal Myomectomy for Large Myomas Sized over 10 cm or Weighing 250 g

Eun Sil Lee,Young-Jae Lee,Shin-Wha Lee,Jeong Yeol Park,Dae-Yeon Kim,Sung Hoon Kim,Yong-Man Kim,Dae-Shik Suh,Young-Tak Kim,Sa Ra Lee

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3349/ymj.2020.61.12.1054

2020-01-01

Yonsei Medical Journal

Abstract:PURPOSE: Here, we compared the operative and perioperative outcomes between robot-assisted laparoscopic myomectomy (RALM) and abdominal myomectomy (AM) in patients with large (>10 cm) or heavy myomas (>250 g).MATERIALS AND METHODS: We included 278 patients who underwent multi-port RALM (n=126) or AM (n=151) for large or heavy myomas in a tertiary care hospital between April 2019 and June 2020. The t-test, chi-square, Bonferroni's test, and multiple linear regression were used.RESULTS: No differences were observed in age, body mass index, parity, or history of pelvic surgery between the two groups. Myoma diameters were not different (10.8±2.52 cm vs. 11.2±3.0 cm, <i>p</i>=0.233), but myomas were lighter in the RALM group than in the AM group (444.6±283.14 g vs. 604.68±368.35 g, respectively, <i>p</i>=0.001). The RALM group had a higher proportion of subserosal myomas, fewer myomas, fewer large myomas over >3 cm, lighter myomas, and longer total operating time. However, the RALM group also had shorter hospital stay and fewer short-term complications. Estimated blood loss (EBL) was not different between the two groups. The number of removed myomas was the most significant factor (coefficient=10.89, <i>p</i><0.0001) affecting the EBL.CONCLUSION: RALM is a feasible myomectomy technique even for large or heavy myomas. RALM patients tend to have shorter hospital stays and fewer postoperative fevers within 48 hours. However, RALM has longer total operating time.

medicine, general & internal
Three-dimensional imaging reconstruction and laparoscopic robotic surgery: a winning combination for a complex case of multiple myomectomy

Antonio Mercorio,Brunella Zizolfi,Simona Barbuto,Roberta Danzi,Attilio Di Spiezio Sardo,Gaby Moawad,Giuseppe Bifulco,Pierluigi Giampaolino

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2023.04.015

Abstract:Objective: To demonstrate the intraoperative use of three-dimensional (3D) imaging reconstruction for a complex case of multiple myomectomy assigned to robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery. Design: Stepwise demonstration of the technique with narrated video footage. Setting: University tertiary care hospital. Patient(s): A 36-year-old nulliparous infertile woman with multiple uterine myomas (>20) presented with menorrhagia and pelvic discomfort for many months. Because of the huge number of fibroids present, the patient was considered eligible for laparoscopic robotic-assisted myomectomy. Intervention(s): A robotic-assisted laparoscopic myomectomy was performed with the use of intraoperative 3D imaging reconstruction. After opening the retroperitoneum through the adnexal triangle and identifying the ureters, to reduce intraoperative bleeding, bulldog clamps were used to temporarily reduce uterine vascularization. A multiple myomectomy was then performed with the use of tenaculum and Maryland bipolar forceps. During the intervention, the surgeon used the 3D uterine reconstruction to adapt its surgical strategy. Multilayer running closure was achieved using a bidirectional barbed suture ensuring introflexion of the serosa. Patients' consent was obtained for publication of the case; institutional review board approval was not required for this case report as per our institution's policy. Main outcome measure(s): Description of a robotic-assisted myomectomy with the intraoperative use of 3D imaging reconstruction. Result(s): The total operative time was 105 minutes. A total of 21 fibroids were removed with 150 mL of intraoperative blood loss. The patient was discharged the day after. Conclusion(s): The application of 3D imaging technology could overcome one of the limitations of robot-assisted minimally invasive surgery, the lack of haptic feedback, enabling the surgeon to rapidly locate myomas and guide the intraoperative plan to optimize the results. Additional studies evaluating the clinical impact of this technique and its improvement are required.
Perioperative and Long-Term Outcomes of Robot-Assisted Partial Nephrectomy: A Systematic Review

Amber B. Tang,Margherita Lamaina,Christopher P. Childers,Selene S. Mak,Qiao Ruan,Meron M. Begashaw,Jonathan Bergman,Marika S. Booth,Paul G. Shekelle,Mark Wilson,William Gunnar,Melinda Maggard-Gibbons,Mark D. Girgis

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0003134820948912

2020-09-09

The American Surgeon

Abstract:Background Adoption of the robotic surgical platform for small renal cancers has rapidly expanded, but its utility compared to other approaches has not been established. The objective of this review is to assess perioperative and long-term oncologic and functional outcomes of robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN) compared to laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (LPN) and open partial nephrectomy (OPN). Methods A search in PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane (2010-2019) was conducted. Of 3877 articles screened, 7 observational studies were included. Results RAPN was associated with 24-50 mL less intraoperative blood loss compared to LPN and 39-84 mL less than OPN. RAPN also demonstrated trends of other postoperative benefits, such as shorter length of stay and fewer major complications. Several studies reported better long-term functional kidney outcomes, but these findings were inconsistent. Recurrence and cancer-specific survival (CSS) were similar across groups. While RAPN had a 5-year CSS of 90.1%-97.9%, LPN and OPN had survival rates of 85.9%-86.9% and 88.5-96.3% respectively. Conclusions RAPN may be associated with a lower estimated blood loss and comparable long-term outcomes when compared to other surgical approaches. However, additional randomized or propensity matched studies are warranted to fully assess long-term functional kidney and oncologic outcomes.
Comparative clinical outcomes of robot-assisted liver resection versus laparoscopic liver resection: A meta-analysis

Lilong Zhang,Qihang Yuan,Yao Xu,Weixing Wang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0240593

IF: 3.7

2020-10-13

PLoS ONE

Abstract:As an emerging technology, robot-assisted surgical system has some potential merits in many complicated endoscopic procedures compared with laparoscopic surgery. But robot-assisted liver resection is still a controversial problem on its advantages compared with laparoscopic liver resection. We aimed to perform the meta-analysis to assess and compare the clinical outcomes of robot-assisted and laparoscopic liver resection.We searched PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase databases, Clinicaltrials, and Opengrey through March 24, 2020, including references of qualifying articles. English-language, original investigations in humans about robot-assisted and laparoscopic hepatectomy were included. Titles, abstracts, and articles were reviewed by at least 2 independent readers. Continuous and dichotomous variables were compared by the weighted mean difference (WMD) and odds ratio (OR), respectively.Of 936 titles identified in our original search, 28 articles met our criteria, involving 3544 patients. Compared with laparoscopy, the robot-assisted groups had longer operative time (WMD: 36.93; 95% CI, 19.74–54.12; P < 0.001), lower conversion rate (OR: 0.63; 95% CI, 0.46–0.87; P = 0.005), higher transfusion rate (WMD: 2.39; 95% CI, 1.51–3.76; P < 0.001) and higher total cost (WMD:0.49; 95% CI, 0.42–0.55; P < 0.001). In addition, the baseline characteristics of patients about largest tumor size was larger (WMD: 0.36; 95% CI, 0.16–0.56; P < 0.001) and malignant lesions rate was higher (WMD: 1.50; 95% CI, 1.21–1.86; P < 0.001) in the robot-assisted versus laparoscopic hepatectomy. The subgroup analysis of minor hepatectomy showed robot-assisted was associated with longer operative time (WMD: 36.00; 95% CI, 12.59–59.41; P = 0.003), longer length of stay (WMD: 0.51; 95% CI, 0.02–1.01; p = 0.04) and higher total cost (WMD: 0.48; 95% CI, 0.25–0.72; P < 0.001) (<a href="#pone-0240593-t003">Table 3</a>); while the subgroup analysis of major hepatectomy showed robot-assisted was associated with lower estimated blood loss (WMD: -122.43; 95% CI, -151.78–-93.08; P < 0.001).Our meta-analysis revealed that robot-assisted was associated with longer operative time, lower conversion rate, higher transfusion rate and total cost, and robot-assisted has certain advantages in major hepatectomy compared with laparoscopic hepatectomy.

multidisciplinary sciences
Implementation of robot‐assisted total mesorectal excision by multiple surgeons in a large teaching hospital: Morbidity, long‐term oncological and functional outcome

Jeroen C. Hol,Kemal Dogan,Charlotte F. J. M. Blanken‐Peeters,Ramon R. J. P. van Eekeren,Marnix A. J. de Roos,Colin Sietses,Ernst J. Spillenaar Bilgen,Bart P. L. Witteman

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/rcs.2227

2021-02-04

Abstract:<section class="article-section__content"><h3 class="article-section__sub-title section1"> Background</h3><p>Robot‐assisted total mesorectal excision (TME) might offer benefits in less morbidity, better functional and long‐term outcome over laparoscopic TME. <span>However its implementation is often described by large single surgeon series using surrogate short‐term outcome.</span></p></section><section class="article-section__content"><h3 class="article-section__sub-title section1"> Methods</h3><p>All consecutive patients undergoing robot‐assisted TME for rectal cancer during implementation between May 2015 and December 2019 performed by five surgeons in a single centre were included. Outcomes included local recurrence rate at 3 years, conversion rate, circumferential resection margin (CRM) positivity rate, 30‐day postoperative morbidity, and outcomes of low anterior resection syndrome (LARS) questionnaires.</p></section><section class="article-section__content"><h3 class="article-section__sub-title section1"> Results</h3><p>In 105 robot‐assisted TME, local recurrence rate at 3 years was 7.4%, conversion to open surgery rate was 8.6%, CRM positivity rate was 5.7% <span>and</span>, 73.3% had good quality specimen, postoperative morbidity rate was 47.6% and anastomotic leakage rate was 9.0%. Incidence of major <span>low anterior resection syndrome (</span>LARS<span>)</span> was 55.3%. </p></section><section class="article-section__content"><h3 class="article-section__sub-title section1"> Conclusions</h3><p>Results of this study described acceptable morbidity, functional and long‐term outcome during implementation of robotic TME for rectal cancer by multiple surgeons in a single centre.</p><p>This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.</p></section>

surgery
Comparison of postoperative pain in robotic and laparoscopic myomectomy: a retrospective cohort study

Ya-Chu Wu,Mun-Kung Hong,Dah-Ching Ding

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11701-024-02105-3

2024-09-23

Abstract:Gynecologic surgery with minimally invasive method using robotic or laparoscopic techniques has gained popularity for reducing perioperative discomfort and length of hospital stay. However, the debate over postoperative pain superiority between traditional laparoscopy and robotic surgery persist. This study compared the postoperative pain of patients within 24 h of robotic (RM) and laparoscopic myomectomy (LM). This retrospective cohort study included 24 and 53 patients who underwent RM and LM, respectively, between January 2019 and July 2023. The primary outcomes were the postoperative pain levels of patients within 24 h and the use and dosage of postoperative analgesia. Additional perioperative analgesia, including long-acting non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (Dynastat) and abdominal nerve block, was also recorded. The secondary outcomes were blood loss and hospitalization duration. The patient characteristics were similar between the groups. Factors that could potentially increase pain, such as the number of ports (p < 0.0001), additional procedures (p = 0.0195), operative time (p < 0.0001), number of myomas (p = 0.0057), and the largest myoma size (p = 0.0086), were significantly higher in the RM group than in the LM group. However, there were no significantly different in the postoperative visual analog scale pain scores, use and dosage of ketorolac and opioid, and use of Dynastat and nerve block between the groups. Hospitalization duration and intraoperative blood loss were similar between the groups. RM and LM offer comparable postoperative pain outcomes, emphasizing the importance of patient-specific factors in decision-making regarding myomectomy techniques.
Comparison of Oncological and Surgical Outcomes of Robot-Assisted, Laparoscopic Modified Radical Hysterectomy and Laparotomy for Endometrial Cancer

Masako Ishikawa,Kentaro Nakayama,Sultana Razia,Hitomi Yamashita,Tomoka Ishibashi,Kosuke Kanno,Seiya Sato,Satoru Kyo

DOI: https://doi.org/10.31083/j.ceog5102047

2024-02-22

Clinical and Experimental Obstetrics & Gynecology

Abstract:Background: This study aimed to compare the oncologic and surgical outcomes of patients treated with robot-assisted modified radical hysterectomy (RAMRH) and total laparoscopic modified radical hysterectomy (TLMRH) for endometrial cancer (EC) with those of patients treated with abdominal modified radical hysterectomy (AMRH). Methods: We performed a retrospective analysis of 133 patients with early-stage EC who underwent different surgical approaches (RAMRH, n = 14; TLMRH, n = 94; AMRH, n = 25) between 2018 and 2021 at Shimane University Hospital. The data on clinical outcomes, including estimated blood loss, duration of surgery, duration of hospital stay, and number of dissected lymph nodes were collected from the patients’ electronic medical records. Kaplan–Meier curves were used to plot survival data, and log-rank tests were used to determine the statistical significance of differences in survival rates. Results: RAMRH showed the lowest bleeding volume (RAMRH: 95 ± 123.21 mL; TLMRH: 140.74 ± 172.60 mL; AMRH: 482.6 ± 429 mL) and shortest hospital stay (RAMRH: 6.43 ± 1.09 days; TLMRH: 7.30 ± 3.39 days; AMRH: 9.88 ± 2.65 days) among the three groups. The number of dissected lymph nodes tended to be higher in the RAMRH group than that in the TLMRH or AMRH group. The different surgical approaches did not correlate with progression-free survival and overall survival. Conclusions: Both RAMRH and TLMRH are safe, feasible, innovative, and minimally invasive surgical alternatives to AMRH for patients with EC.

obstetrics & gynecology
Robot-assisted Vs Laparoscopic Vs Open Abdominoperineal Resections for Low Rectal Cancer: Short-term Outcomes of a Single-Center Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial

Ye Wei,Jianmin Xu,Li Ren,Qingyang Feng,Guodong He,Jingwen Chen,Wenju Chang,Dexiang Zhu,Tuo Yi,Qi Lin

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2016.08.226

IF: 45.3

2017-01-01

Journal of Clinical Oncology

Abstract:3603 Background: Currently, robotic surgery for rectal cancer using da Vinci System is common. However, there is almost no clinical trial reported. This randomized controlled trial aims to compare the safety and efficacy of robotic, laparoscopic and open abdominoperineal resection (APR) for low rectal cancer. Methods: From September 2013 to August 2016, patients aged from 18 to 75 years, with low rectal cancer within 5 cm from anal verge, clinical T1 to T3, no distant metastases, were randomly assigned to receive either robotic procedures (RAP), laparoscopic procedures (LAP) or open surgery (OS) for APR in 1:1:1 ratio. The primary endpoint was postoperative complication rate. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01985698). Results: Totally 406 patients were randomly assigned. Actually, 135 finished RAP, 131 finished LAP, and 137 finished OS (including 4 convert from LAP to OS). RAP had significantly lower postoperative complication rate (11.1%) than both LAP (21.4%, P = 0.023) and OS (27.7%, P = 0.001). Also, RAP reduced intraoperative hemorrhage (median [interquartile range], 100 [90-110] ml) than LAP (130 [100-150] ml, P < 0.001) and OS (150 [120-260] ml, P < 0.001). And RAP promoted postoperative recovery, with shorter days to first flatus (1.0 [1.0-2.0] day) than LAP (2.0 [2.0-3.0] day, P < 0.001) and OS (3.0 [2.0-4.0] day, P < 0.001), shorter days to first automatic urination (2.0 [2.0-3.0] day) than LAP (3.0 [2.0-4.0] day, P < 0.001) and OS (3.0 [2.0-4.0] day, P < 0.001), and shorter days to discharge (5.0 [5.0-6.0] days) than LAP (6.0 [5.0-7.0] days, P < 0.001) and OS (6.0 [5.0-7.0] day, P = 0.005). There was no significant difference in open conversion rate, resection margin involvement (including circumferential resection margin), number of lymph node harvested and pathological tumor stage. Conclusions: Robotic APR was safer, and reproduce equivalent surgical quality of conventional laparoscopic and open surgery. Also, it provided less injury and faster functional recovery. Clinical trial information: NCT01985698.
Intraoperative and postoperative outcomes of robot-assisted cholecystectomy: a systematic review

Rivfka Shenoy,Michael A Mederos,Linda Ye,Selene S Mak,Meron M Begashaw,Marika S Booth,Paul G Shekelle,Mark Wilson,William Gunnar,Melinda Maggard-Gibbons,Mark D Girgis

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-021-01673-x

2021-04-23

Abstract:Background: Rapid adoption of robotic-assisted general surgery procedures, particularly for cholecystectomy, continues while questions remain about its benefits and utility. The objective of this study was to compare the clinical effectiveness of robot-assisted cholecystectomy for benign gallbladder disease as compared with the laparoscopic approach. Methods: A literature search was performed from January 2010 to March 2020, and a narrative analysis was performed as studies were heterogeneous. Results: Of 887 articles screened, 44 met the inclusion criteria (range 20-735,537 patients). Four were randomized controlled trials, and four used propensity-matching. There were variable comparisons between operative techniques with only 19 out of 44 studies comparing techniques using the same number of ports. Operating room time was longer for the robot-assisted technique in the majority of studies (range 11-55 min for 22 studies, p < 0.05; 15 studies showed no difference; two studies showed shorter laparoscopic times), while conversion rates and intraoperative complications were not different. No differences were detected for the length of stay, surgical site infection, or readmissions. Across studies comparing single-port robot-assisted to multi-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy, there was a higher rate of incisional hernia; however, no differences were noted when comparing single-port robot-assisted to single-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Conclusions: Clinical outcomes were similar for benign, elective gallbladder disease for robot-assisted compared with laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Overall, the rates of complications were low. More high-quality studies are needed as the robot-assisted technique expands to more complex gallbladder disease, where its utility may prove increasingly beneficial. Systematic review registration: PROSPERO CRD42020156945.

Robot-Assisted Laparoscopic Myomectomy: A Four Year Outcomes Analysis

Robot-assisted Versus Laparoscopic Surgery for Rectal Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Efficacy and safety of robot-assisted laparoscopic myomectomy versus laparoscopic myomectomy: a systematic evaluation and meta-analysis

Robotic‐assisted laparoscopic versus abdominal and laparoscopic myomectomy: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

Long-term clinical outcomes of total mesorectal excision and selective lateral pelvic lymph node dissection for advanced low rectal cancer: a comparative study of a robotic versus laparoscopic approach

Clinical Outcomes of Robotic Surgery Compared to Conventional Surgical Approaches (Laparoscopic or Open)

Robotic Partial Nephrectomy: Current Technique and Outcomes

Oncologic and Perioperative Outcomes of Robot-Assisted Versus Conventional Laparoscopy for the Treatment of Clinically Uterine-Confined High-Grade Adenocarcinoma

Long-Term Outcomes of Robot-Assisted Surgery in Patients with Colorectal Cancer

Myomectomy with ArtiSential fully articulating laparoscopic instruments: A prospective multicenter study

A comparative retrospective analysis on robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery compared to conventional laparoscopy in case of myomectomy: experience in a third-level hospital of Southern Italy

Single-Site Robotic Myomectomy without Accessory Instrument Compared with Two-Port Laparoscopic Myomectomy: A Propensity Score Matching Analysis

Robot-Assisted Laparoscopic Myomectomy versus Abdominal Myomectomy for Large Myomas Sized over 10 cm or Weighing 250 g

Three-dimensional imaging reconstruction and laparoscopic robotic surgery: a winning combination for a complex case of multiple myomectomy

Perioperative and Long-Term Outcomes of Robot-Assisted Partial Nephrectomy: A Systematic Review

Comparative clinical outcomes of robot-assisted liver resection versus laparoscopic liver resection: A meta-analysis

Implementation of robot‐assisted total mesorectal excision by multiple surgeons in a large teaching hospital: Morbidity, long‐term oncological and functional outcome

Comparison of postoperative pain in robotic and laparoscopic myomectomy: a retrospective cohort study

Comparison of Oncological and Surgical Outcomes of Robot-Assisted, Laparoscopic Modified Radical Hysterectomy and Laparotomy for Endometrial Cancer

Robot-assisted Vs Laparoscopic Vs Open Abdominoperineal Resections for Low Rectal Cancer: Short-term Outcomes of a Single-Center Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial

Intraoperative and postoperative outcomes of robot-assisted cholecystectomy: a systematic review