Abstract:Background Robotic surgery is the latest innovation in the field of minimally invasive surgery. In the case of robotic surgery, instead of directly moving the instruments the surgeon uses a robotic system to control the instruments for surgical procedures. Robotic surgical systems have been used in various gynaecological surgeries for benign disease, such as hysterectomy (removal of the uterus), myomectomy (removal of uterine leiomyomas) and tubal reanastomosis (the reuniting of a divided tube). The mounting evidence demonstrates the feasibility and safety of robotic surgery in benign gynaecological disease. Robotic surgery is advertised as having promising advantages including more precise vision and procedures, improved ergonomics and shorter length of hospital stay. However, the main disadvantages of the robotic surgical system should not be overlooked, including the high cost of disposable instruments and retraining for both surgeons and nurses. Objectives To assess the effectiveness and safety of robot-assisted surgery in the treatment of benign gynaecological disease. Search methods We searched the Cochrane Menstrual Disorders and Subfertility Group's Trial Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (Issue 2, 2011), MEDLINE and EMBASE up to November 2011 and citation lists of relevant publications. Selection criteria All randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing robotic surgery for benign gynaecological disease to laparoscopic or open surgical procedures. RCTs comparing different types of robotic assistants were also included. We contacted study authors for unpublished information, but failed in obtaining a response. Data collection and analysis Two review authors independently screened studies for inclusion. The domains assessed for risk of bias were allocation concealment, blinding, incomplete outcome data and selective outcome reporting. Odds ratios (OR) were used for reporting dichotomous data with 95% confidence intervals (CI), whilst mean differences (MD) were determined for continuous data. Statistical heterogeneity was assessed using the I-2 statistic. We contacted the primary authors for missing data but failed in obtaining a response. Main results Two trials involving 158 participants were included. Since one included trial was published in conference proceedings, limited usable data were available for further analysis. The only analysis in this trial showed comparable rates of conversions to open surgery between the robotic group and the laparoscopic group (OR 1.41, 95% CI 0.22 to 9.01; P = 0.72). One RCT showed longer operation time (MD 66.00, 95% CI 40.93 to 91.07; P < 0.00001), higher cost (MD 1936.00, 95% CI 445.69 to 3426.31; P = 0.01) in the robotic group compared with the laparoscopic group. Also, both studies reported that robotic and laparoscopic surgery seemed comparable regarding intraoperative outcome, complications, length of hospital stay and quality of life. Authors' conclusions Currently, the limited evidence showed that robotic surgery did not benefit women with benign gynaecological disease in effectiveness or in safety. Further well-designed RCTs with complete reported data are required to confirm or refute this conclusion.

Efficacy and safety of robotic radical hysterectomy in cervical cancer compared with laparoscopic radical hysterectomy: a meta-analysis

Robotic versus laparoscopic Gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a systematic review and updated meta-analysis

Robotic-Assisted Radical Hysterectomy Results in Better Surgical Outcomes Compared with the Traditional Laparoscopic Radical Hysterectomy for the Treatment of Cervical Cancer

Safety and Effectiveness of Robotic Hysterectomy Versus Conventional Laparoscopic Hysterectomy in Patients with Cervical Cancer in China

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

Laparoscopic Radical Hysterectomy in Early Stage Cervical Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Robot-assisted versus open radical hysterectomy: A multi-institutional experience for early-stage cervical cancer

Laparoscopic Vs. Open Abdominal Radical Hysterectomy for Cervical Cancer: A Single-Institution, Propensity Score Matching Study in China

Outcomes Associated with Different Surgical Approaches to Radical Hysterectomy: A Systematic Review and Network Meta‐analysis

Robotic Versus Open Radical Cystectomy: an Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

The role of robotic-assisted surgery in the management of rectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Comparison of Perioperative and Oncologic Outcomes Between Robot-Assisted and Laparoscopic Radical Cystectomy for Bladder Cancer: a Systematic Review and Updated Meta-Analysis

Can robotic-assisted radical cystectomy provide patients with a smaller trauma and faster recovery period? A systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative trials

Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Total Mesorectal Excision for Rectal Cancer: a Meta-analysis of Eight Studies

Laparoscopic Radical Surgery In Early-Stage Cervical Cancer: Short-Term And Long-Term Outcomes And Survival Analysis

Robotic surgery for benign gynaecological disease.

Comparative Effectiveness of Open, Laparoscopic and Robot-Assisted Radical Cystectomy for Bladder Cancer: a Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.

An optimized robotic surgical technique for cervical cancer: investigating whether the use of the pulling robotic arm has better surgical outcomes

Robotic-Assisted vs. Standard Laparoscopic Surgery for Rectal Cancer Resection: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of 19,731 Patients

Evaluation of the Efficacy of Laparoscopic-Assisted Radical Vaginal Hysterectomy and Abdominal Radical Hysterectomy for Treating Cervical Cancer: a Meta-Analysis

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