Robotic tubal anastomosis: surgical technique and cost effectiveness

Fertility and Sterility

Volumn 90, Issue 4, 2008, Pages 1175-1179

  Dharia Patel, Sejal P ^a   Steinkampf, Michael P ^b   Whitten, Scott J ^c   Malizia, Beth A ^d  

^a OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b Alabama Fertility Specialists   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA AT BIRMINGHAM   (United States)

^d BETH ISRAEL DEACONESS MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

cost effectiveness; robotic assisted surgery; Tubal anastomosis; tubal surgery

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ANASTOMOSIS; ARTICLE; CLINICAL ARTICLE; COMPUTER ASSISTED SURGERY; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; FEMALE; FEMALE FERTILITY; HOSPITALIZATION; HUMAN; LAPAROTOMY; LIVE BIRTH; OPERATION DURATION; POSTOPERATIVE COMPLICATION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; ROBOTICS; SURGICAL TECHNIQUE; TREATMENT OUTCOME; UTERINE TUBE LIGATION;

ADULT; ANASTOMOSIS, SURGICAL; COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; FALLOPIAN TUBES; FEASIBILITY STUDIES; FEMALE; HEALTH CARE COSTS; HUMANS; INFERTILITY, FEMALE; LAPAROTOMY; PREGNANCY; PREGNANCY OUTCOME; ROBOTICS; SURGERY, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; TREATMENT OUTCOME; UNITED STATES;

EID: 52949106159     PISSN: 00150282     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2007.07.1392     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. UNDP/UNFPA/WHO/World Bank Special Programme of Research, Development and Research Training in Human Reproduction (HRP), World Health Organization. Advances in female sterilization research. Prog Reprod Health Res Newsl 1995;36:1. Available at: http://www.who.int/reproductive-health/hrp/progress/35/prog35.pdf. Accessed on August 16, 2007.
2. Hillis S.D., Marchbanks P.A., Tylor L.R., and Peterson H.B. Poststerilization regret: findings from the United States Collaborative Review of Sterilization. Obstet Gyecol 93 (1999) 889-895
3. Spivak M.M., Librach C.L., and Rosenthal D.M. Microsurgical reversal of sterilization: a six year study. Am J Obstet Gynecol 154 (1986) 355-361
4. Divers Jr. W.A. Characteristics of women requesting reversal of sterilization. Fertil Steril 41 (1984) 233-236
5. Siegler A.M., Hulka J., and Peretz A. Reversibility of human sterilization. Fertil Steril 43 (1985) 499-510
6. Posaci C., Camus M., Osmanagaoglu K., and Devroey P. Tubal surgery in the era of assisted reproductive technology: clinical options. Hum Reprod 14 (1999) 120-136
7. Winston R.M. Reversal of tubal sterilization. Clin Obstet Gynecol 23 (1980) 1261-1268
8. Silber S.J., and Cohen R. Microsurgical reversal of female sterilization: the role of tubal length. Fertil Steril 33 (1980) 598-601
9. Rock J.A., Guzick D.S., Katz E., Zacur H.A., and King T.M. Tubal anastomosis: pregnancy success following reversal of Falope ring or monopolar cautery sterilization. Fertil Steril 48 (1987) 13-17
10. Yuen P.M., Yu K.M., Yip S.K., Lau W.C., Rogers M.S., and Chang A. A randomized prospective study of laparoscopy and laparotomy in the management of benign ovarian masses. Am J Obstet Gynecol 177 (1997) 109-114
11. Lo L., Pun T.C., and Chan S. Tubal ectopic pregnancy: an evaluation of laparoscopic surgery versus laparotomy in 614 patients. Aust NZ J Obstet Gynaecol 39 (1999) 185-187
12. Koh C.H., and Janik G.M. Laparoscopic microsurgical tubal anastomosis. Obstet Gynecol Clin North Am 26 (1999) 189-200
13. Reich H., McGlynn F., Parente C., Sekel L., and Levie M. Laparoscopic tubal anastomosis. J Am Assoc Gynecol Laparosc 1 (1993) 16-19
14. Sedbon E., Delajoulinieres J.B., Boudouris O., and Madelenat P. Tubal desterilisation through exclusive laparoscopy. Hum Reprod 4 (1989) 158-159
15. Stylopoulos N., and Rattner D. Robotics and ergonomics. Surg Clin North Am 83 (2003) 1-12
16. Sturges R.H., and Wright P.K. A quantification of dexterity. J Robot Comp Integr Manuf 6 (1989) 3-14
17. Ballantyne G.H. Robotic surgery, telerobotic surgery, telepresence, and telementoring. Surg Endosc 16 (2002) 1389-1402
18. Berguer R., Forkey D.L., and Smith W.D. Ergonomic problems associated with laparoscopic surgery. Surg Endosc 13 (1999) 466-468
19. Falcone T., and Goldberg J.M. Robotics in gynecology. Surg Clin North Am 83 (2003) 1483-1489
20. Satava R.M. Robotic surgery: from past to future-a personal journey. Surg Clin North Am 83 (2003) 1-6
21. Lawton M.P., and Brody E.M. Assessment of older people: self-maintaining and instrumental activities of daily living. Gerontologist 9 (1969) 179-186
22. Department of Labor, Bureau of Wages, Earning and Benefits. Available at: www.bls.gov. Accessed on: April 1, 2004.
23. Falcone T., Goldberg J.M., Margossian H., and Stevens L. Robotic-assisted laparoscopic microsurgical tubal anastomosis: a human pilot study. Fertil Steril 73 (2000) 1040-1042
24. Goldberg J.M., and Falcone T. Laparoscopic microsurgical tubal anastomosis with and without robotic assistance. Hum Reprod 18 (2003) 145-147
25. Degueldre M., Vandromme J., Huong P.T., and Cadiere G.B. Robotically assisted laparoscopic microsurgical tubal reanastomosis: a feasibility study. Fertil Steril 74 (2000) 1020-1023