Robot-assisted techniques and outcomes in the realm of pelvic reconstructive surgery

Clinical Obstetrics and Gynecology

Volumn 54, Issue 3, 2011, Pages 412-419

  Parnell, Brent A ^a   Matthews, Catherine A ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

Author keywords

pelvic organ prolapse; prolapse; robotic surgery; robotic assisted surgery; sacrocervicopexy; sacrocolpopexy

Indexed keywords

ANTERIOR INTRAVAGINAL SLINGPLASTY; BODY MASS; CLINICAL EFFECTIVENESS; COMPRESSION BANDAGE; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; HOSPITALIZATION; HUMAN; HYSTERECTOMY; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; LAPAROSCOPIC SURGERY; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PATIENT POSITIONING; PELVIC ORGAN PROLAPSE; PELVIS RECONSTRUCTION; PELVIS SURGERY; REVIEW; ROBOT ASSISTED TECHNIQUE; ROBOTICS; TASK PERFORMANCE; THREE DIMENSIONAL IMAGING; UTERUS PROLAPSE;

FEMALE; HUMANS; LAPAROSCOPY; PELVIC ORGAN PROLAPSE; ROBOTICS; SURGERY, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 80052217453     PISSN: 00099201     EISSN: 15325520     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/GRF.0b013e31822b48c6     Document Type: Review

References (17)

1. Maher C, Feiner B, Baessler K, et al. Surgical management of pelvic organ prolapse in women. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2010;CD004014.
2. Nezhat CH, Nezhat F, Nezhat C. Laparoscopic sacral colpopexy for vaginal vault prolapse. Obstet Gynecol. 1994;84: 885-888. (Pubitemid 24329865)
3. Wu JM, Hundley AF, Fulton RG, Forecasting the prevalence of pelvic floor disorders in U.S. Women: 2010 to 2050. Obstet Gynecol. 2009;114:1278-1283.
4. Olsen AL, Smith VJ, Bergstrom JO, et al. Epidemiology of surgically managed pelvic organ prolapse and urinary incontinence. Obstet Gynecol. 1997;89:501-506. (Pubitemid 27133519)
5. Matthews CA, Reid N, Ramakrishnan V, et al. Evaluation of the introduction of robotic technology on route of hysterectomy and complications in the first year of use. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2010;203: 499 e1-499 e5.
6. Visco AG, Advincula AP. Robotic gynecologic surgery. Obstet Gynecol. 2008; 112:1369-1384.
7. Barnett JC, Judd JP, Wu JM, et al. Cost comparison among robotic, laparoscopic, and open hysterectomy for endometrial cancer. ObstetGynecol. 2010;116:685-693.
8. Judd JP, Siddiqui NY, Barnett JC, et al. Cost-minimization analysis of roboticassisted, laparoscopic, and abdominal sacrocolpopexy. JMinim InvasiveGynecol. 2010;17:493-499.
9. Kho RM, Hilger WS, Hentz JG, et al. Robotic hysterectomy: Technique and initial outcomes. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2007;197:113 e1-113 e4.
10. Price N, Slack A, Jackson SR. Laparoscopic hysteropexy: The initial results of a uterine suspension procedure for uterovaginal prolapse. BJOG. 2010;117:62-68.
11. Ridgeway B, Frick AC, Walter MD. Hysteropexy: A review. Minerva Ginecol. 2008;60:509-528.
12. Nygaard IE, McCreery R, Brubaker L, et al. Abdominal sacrocolpopexy: A comprehensive review. Obstet Gynecol. 2004;104:805-823. (Pubitemid 40458813)
13. Frick AC, Walters MD, Larkin KS, et al. Risk of unanticipated abnormal gynecologic pathology at the time of hysterectomy for uterovaginal prolapse. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2010;202:507 e1-507 e4.
14. Matthews CA, Schubert CM, Woodward AP, et al. Variance in abdominal wall anatomy and port placement in women undergoing robotic gynecologic surgery. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2010;17:583-586.
15. Geller EJ, Siddiqui NY, Wu JM, et al. Short-term outcomes of robotic sacrocolpopexy compared with abdominal sacrocolpopexy. Obstet Gynecol. 2008;112: 1201-1206.
16. Tan-Kim J, Menefee S, Luber K, et al. Robotic-assisted and laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy: Comparing operative times, costs and outcomes. Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg. 2011;17:44-49.
17. Paraiso MF, Chen C, Jelovsek JE, et al. Conventional laparoscopic versus robotic- assisted laparoscopic sacral colpopexy: A randomized controlled trial. Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg. 2010; 16 (5s):S58-S59.