Robot-assisted surgery:-impact on gynaecological and pelvic floor reconstructive surgery

International Urogynecology Journal

Volumn 23, Issue 9, 2012, Pages 1163-1173

  O'Sullivan, O E ^a   O'Reilly, B A ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY COLLEGE CORK   (Ireland)

Author keywords

Da Vinci Surgical System; Robot assisted surgery; Urogynaecology

Indexed keywords

EID: 84868368177     PISSN: 09373462     EISSN: 14333023     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s00192-012-1790-3     Document Type: Review

References (97)

1. Reza M et al (2010) Meta-analysis of observational studies on the safety and effectiveness of robotic gynaecological surgery. Br J Surg 97(12):1772-83
2. Advincula AP, Falcone T (2004) Laparoscopic robotic gynecologic surgery. Obstet Gynecol Clin North Am 31(3):599-609, ix-x
3. Ho C, Tsakonas E, Tran K, Cimon K et al (2011) Robot-Assisted Surgery Compared with Open Surgery and Laparoscopic Surgery: Clinical Effectiveness and Economic Analyses. Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health
4. Camberlin C, Senn A, Leys M, De Laet C (2009) Robot-assisted surgery: health technology assessment. B. H. C. K. C. (KCE), Editor
5. Secretariat MA (2010) Robotic-assisted minimally invasive Surgery for gynecologic and urologic oncology. O. H. T. A. S. 2010, Editor
6. Thavaneswaran, P.e.a., Robotic-assisted surgery for urological, cardiac and gynaecological procedures., ASERNIP-S, Editor 2009: Adelaide
7. HIQA, Health technology assessment of robot-assisted surgery in selected surgical procedures, H. I.a. Q. Authority, Editor 2012: Dublin
8. Maher CM et al (2011) Surgical management of pelvic organ prolapse in women: the updated summary version Cochrane review. Int Urogynecol J 22(11):1445-57
9. Ganatra AM et al (2009) The current status of laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy: a review. Eur Urol 55(5):1089-103
10. Akladios CY et al (2010) Laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy for female genital organ prolapse: establishment of a learning curve. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 149(2):218-21
11. Claerhout F et al (2009) Medium-term anatomic and functional results of laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy beyond the learning curve. Eur Urol 55(6):1459-67
12. Subramanian D et al (2009) Rate, type, and cost of pelvic organ prolapse surgery in Germany, France, and England. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 144(2):177-81
13. Paraiso MF et al (2011) Laparoscopic compared with robotic sacrocolpopexy for vaginal prolapse: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol
14. White WM et al (2009) Single-port laparoscopic abdominal sacral colpopexy: initial experience and comparative outcomes. Urology 74(5):1008-12
15. Lenihan JP Jr, Kovanda C, Seshadri-Kreaden U (2008) What is the learning curve for robotic assisted gynecologic surgery? J Minim Invasive Gynecol 15(5):589-94
16. Daneshgari F et al (2007) Robotic abdominal sacrocolpopexy/sacrouteropexy repair of advanced female pelvic organ prolaspe (POP): utilizing POP-quantification-based staging and outcomes. BJU Int 100(4):875-9
17. Geller EJ et al (2008) Short-term outcomes of robotic sacrocolpopexy compared with abdominal sacrocolpopexy. Obstet Gynecol 112(6):1201-6
18. Elliott DS, Krambeck AE, Chow GK (2006) Long-term results of robotic assisted laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy for the treatment of high grade vaginal vault prolapse. J Urol 176(2):655-9
19. Gocmen A, Sanlikan F, Ucar MG (2011) Robotic-assisted sacrocolpopexy/sacrocervicopexy repair of pelvic organ prolapse: initial experience. Arch Gynecol Obstet
20. Gilleran JP, Johnson M, Hundley A (2010) Robotic-assisted laparoscopic mesh sacrocolpopexy. Ther Adv Urol 2(5-06):195-208
21. Wattiez A (2003) Laparoscopic repair of vaginal vault prolapse. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol 15:315-19
22. Chan SS et al (2011) Laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy for the treatment of vaginal vault prolapse: with or without robotic assistance. Hong Kong Med J 17(1):54-60
23. Di Marco DS et al (2004) Robotic-assisted laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy for treatment of vaginal vault prolapse. Urology 63(2):373-6
24. Freilich DA et al (2010) Parental satisfaction after open versus robot assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty: results from modified Glasgow Children's Benefit Inventory Survey. The Journal of urology 183(2):704-8
25. Ridgeway B, Frick AC, Walter MD (2008) Hysteropexy. A review. Minerva ginecologica 60(6):509-28
26. Maher CF, Carey MP, Murray CJ (2001) Laparoscopic suture hysteropexy for uterine prolapse. Obstetrics and gynecology 97(6):1010-4
27. Krause HG et al (2006) Laparoscopic sacral suture hysteropexy for uterine prolapse. Int Urogynecolog J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct 17(4):378-81
28. Feiner B, Gietelink L, Maher C (2010) Anterior vaginal mesh sacrospinous hysteropexy and posterior fascial plication for anterior compartment dominated uterovaginal prolapse. Int Urogynecol J 21(2):203-8
29. Price N, Slack A, Jackson SR (2010) Laparoscopic hysteropexy: the initial results of a uterine suspension procedure for uterovaginal prolapse. BJOG 117(1):62-8
30. Cvach K, Dwyer P (2011) Surgical management of pelvic organ prolapse: abdominal and vaginal approaches. World J Urol
31. Busby G, Broome J (2010) Successful pregnancy outcome following laparoscopic sacrohysteropexy for second degree uterine prolapse. Gynecol Surg 7:271-273
32. Lewis CM, Culligan P (2011) Sacrohysteropexy followed by successful pregnancy and eventual reoperation for prolapse. Int Urogynecol J
33. Vitobello D, Siesto G, Bulletti C (2012) Robotic sacral hysteropexy for pelvic organ prolapse. Int J Med Robot
34. Melamud O et al (2005) Laparoscopic vesicovaginal fistula repair with robotic reconstruction. Urology 65(1):163-6
35. Sundaram BM, Kalidasan G, Hemal AK (2006) Robotic repair of vesicovaginal fistula: case series of five patients. Urology 67(5):970-3
36. Reynolds R, Advincula AP (2006) Robot-assisted laparoscopic hysterectomy: technique and initial experience. Am J Surg 191:555-560
37. Bell MC et al (2008) Comparison of outcomes and cost for endometrial cancer staging via traditional laparotomy, standard laparoscopy and robotic techniques. Gynecol Oncol 111(3):407-11
38. Boggess JF et al (2008) A case-control study of robot-assisted type III radical hysterectomy with pelvic lymph node dissection compared with open radical hysterectomy. Am J Obstet Gynecol 199(4):357, e1-7
39. Boggess JF et al (2008) A comparative study of 3 surgical methods for hysterectomy with staging for endometrial cancer: robotic assistance, laparoscopy, laparotomy. Am J Obstet Gynecol 199(4):360, e1-9
40. De Nardis SA et al (2008) Robotically assisted laparoscopic hysterectomy versus total abdominal hysterectomy and lymphadenectomy for endometrial cancer. Gynecol Oncol 111(3):412-7
41. Estape R et al (2009) A case matched analysis of robotic radical hysterectomy with lymphadenectomy compared with laparoscopy and laparotomy. Gynecol Oncol 113(3):357-61
42. Geisler JP et al (2010) Robotically assisted laparoscopic radical hysterectomy compared with open radical hysterectomy. Int J Gynecol Cancer 20(3):438-42
43. Gocmen A, Sanlikan F, Ucar MG (2010) Comparison of roboticassisted surgery outcomes with laparotomy for endometrial cancer staging in Turkey. Arch Gynecol Obstet 282(5):539-45
44. Cantrell LA et al (2010) Survival outcomes for women undergoing type III robotic radical hysterectomy for cervical cancer: a 3-year experience. Gynecol Oncol 117(2):260-5
45. Veljovich DS et al (2008) Robotic surgery in gynecologic oncology: program initiation and outcomes after the first year with comparison with laparotomy for endometrial cancer staging. Am J Obstet Gynecol 198(6):679 e1-9; discussion 679 e9-10
46. Schreuder HW et al (2010) From open radical hysterectomy to robotassisted laparoscopic radical hysterectomy for early stage cervical cancer: aspects of a single institution learning curve. Gynecol Surg 7(3):253-258
47. Seamon LG et al (2009) Comprehensive surgical staging for endometrial cancer in obese patients: comparing robotics and laparotomy. Obstet Gynecol 114(1):16-21
48. Nam EJ et al (2010) A case-control study of robotic radical hysterectomy and pelvic lymphadenectomy using 3 robotic arms compared with abdominal radical hysterectomy in cervical cancer. Int J Gynecol Cancer 20(7):1284-9
49. Nevadunsky N, Clark R, Ghosh S, Muto M, Berkowitz R, Vitonis A et al (2010) Comparison of robot-assisted total laparoscopic hysterectomy and total abdominal hysterectomy for treatment of endometrial cancer in obese and morbidly obese patients. J Robot Surg 4(4):247-52
50. Matthews CA et al (2010) Evaluation of the introduction of robotic technology on route of hysterectomy and complications in the first year of use. Am J Obstet Gynecol 203(5):499, e1-5
51. Lowe MP (2009) A comparson of robot-assisted and traditional radical hysterectomy for early-stage cervical cancer. J Robot Surg 3(1):19-23
52. Maggioni A et al (2009) Robotic approach for cervical cancer: comparison with laparotomy: a case control study. Gynecol Oncol 115(1):60-4
53. Goel M, Zollinger T, Moore D (2011) Surgical staging of endometrial cancer: robotic versus open technique outcomes in a contemporary single surgeon series. J Robot Surg 5(2):109-114
54. Halliday D, Lau S, Vaknin Z, Deland C, Levental M, McNamara E (2010) et al, Robotic radical hysterectomy: comparison of outcomes and cost. Journal of Robotic Surgery 4(4):211-216
55. Gocmen A, Sanlikan F, Ucar M (2010) Comparison of outcomes between laparotomy and robotic technique for cervical cancer. J Robot Surg 4(2):123-127
56. Jung YW et al (2010) Robot-assisted staging using three robotic arms for endometrial cancer: comparison to laparoscopy and laparotomy at a single institution. J Surg Oncol 101(2):116-21
57. Ko EM et al (2008) Robotic versus open radical hysterectomy: a comparative study at a single institution. Gynecol Oncol 111(3):425-30
58. Cardenas-Goicoechea J et al (2010) Surgical outcomes of roboticassisted surgical staging for endometrial cancer are equivalent to traditional laparoscopic staging at a minimally invasive surgical center. Gynecol Oncol 117(2):224-8
59. Gehrig PA et al (2008) What is the optimal minimally invasive surgical procedure for endometrial cancer staging in the obese and morbidly obese woman? Gynecol Oncol 111(1):41-5
60. Giep BN, Giep HN, Hubert HB (2010) Comparison of minimally invasive surgical approaches for hysterectomy at a community hospital: robotic-assisted laparoscopic hysterectomy, laparoscopic-assisted vaginal hysterectomy and laparoscopic supracervical hysterectomy. J Robot Surg 4(3):167-175
61. Holtz DO et al (2010) Endometrial cancer surgery costs: robot vs laparoscopy. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 17(4):500-3
62. Lim PC, Kang E, Park do H (2011) A comparative detail analysis of the learning curve and surgical outcome for robotic hysterectomy with lymphadenectomy versus laparoscopic hysterectomy with lymphadenectomy in treatment of endometrial cancer: a casematched controlled study of the first one hundred twenty two patients. Gynecol Oncol 120(3):413-8
63. Nezhat C et al (2009) Laparoscopic hysterectomy with and without a robot: stanford experience. JSLS 13(2):125-8
64. Payne TN, Dauterive FR (2008) A comparison of total laparoscopic hysterectomy to robotically assisted hysterectomy: surgical outcomes in a community practice. JMinim Invasive Gynecol 15(3):286-91
65. Sarlos D et al (2010) Robotic hysterectomy versus conventional laparoscopic hysterectomy: outcome and cost analyses of a matched case-control study. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 150(1):92-6
66. Seamon LG et al (2009) Minimally invasive comprehensive surgical staging for endometrial cancer: robotics or laparoscopy? Gynecol Oncol 113(1):36-41
67. Sert B, Abeler V (2007) Robotic radical hysterectomy in earlystage cervical carcinoma patients, comparing results with total laparoscopic radical hysterectomy cases. The future is now? Int J Med Robot 3(3):224-8
68. Shashoua AR, Gill D, Locher SR (2009) Robotic-assisted total laparoscopic hysterectomy versus conventional total laparoscopic hysterectomy. JSLS 13(3):364-9
69. Dharia Patel SP et al (2008) Robotic tubal anastomosis: surgical technique and cost effectiveness. Fertil Steril 90(4):1175-9
70. Cronin C, Hewitt M, Harley I, O'Donoghue K, O'Reilly BA (2012) Robot-assisted laparoscopic cervical cerclage as an interval procedure. Gynecological Surgery. in press
71. Barakat EE et al (2011) Robotic-assisted, laparoscopic, and abdominal myomectomy: a comparison of surgical outcomes. Obstet Gynecol 117(2 Pt 1):256-65
72. Ascher-Walsh CJ, Capes TL (2010) Robot-assisted laparoscopic myomectomy is an improvement over laparotomy in women with a limited number of myomas. JMinim Invasive Gynecol 17(3):306-10
73. Nezhat C et al (2010) Robotic versus standard laparoscopy for the treatment of endometriosis. Fertil Steril 94(7):2758-60
74. Magrina JF et al (2009) Robotic adnexectomy compared with laparoscopy for adnexal mass. Obstet Gynecol 114(3):581-4
75. Lambaudie E et al (2010) Role of robot-assisted laparoscopy in adjuvant surgery for locally advanced cervical cancer. Eur J Surg Oncol 36(4):409-13
76. Yim GW et al (2011) Role of robot-assisted surgery in cervical cancer. Int J Gynecol Cancer 21(1):173-81
77. Pasic R, Rizzo J, Fang H (2010) Comparing robot-assisted with conventional laparoscopic hysterectomy: impact on cost and clinical outcome. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 17(1):730-738
78. Judd JP et al (2010) Cost-minimization analysis of robotic-assisted, laparoscopic, and abdominal sacrocolpopexy. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 17(4):493-9
79. Subak LL et al (2001) Cost of pelvic organ prolapse surgery in the United States. Obstet Gynecol 98(4):646-51
80. Banta D (2003) The development of health technology assessment. Health policy 63(2):121-32
81. Banta HD, Gelband H, Jonsson E, Battista R (1994) Health care technology and its assessment in eight countries. Health Policy 30:1-2
82. Bokhari MB et al (2011) Learning curve for robotic-assisted laparoscopic colorectal surgery. Surg Endosc 25(3):855-60
83. Seamon LG et al (2009) A detailed analysis of the learning curve: robotic hysterectomy and pelvic-aortic lymphadenectomy for endometrial cancer. Gynecologic oncology 114(2):162-7
84. Akl MN et al (2009) Robotic-assisted sacrocolpopexy: technique and learning curve. Surg Endosc 23(10):2390-4
85. Kramer BA et al (2009) Robot-assisted laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy as management for pelvic organ prolapse. J Endourol 23(4):655-8
86. Elliott DS (2007) Assessment of the durability of robot-assisted laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy for treatment of vaginal vault prolapse. J Robotic Surg 1:163-8
87. Muffly T et al (2009) An evaluation of knot integrity when tied robotically and conventionally. Am J Obstet Gynecol 200(5):e18-20
88. Yohannes P et al (2002) Comparison of robotic versus laparoscopic skills: is there a difference in the learning curve? Urology 60(1):39-45, discussion 45
89. Ng JS et al (2011) Gynaecologic robot-assisted cancer and endoscopic surgery (GRACES) in a tertiary referral centre. Ann Acad Med Singapore 40(5):208-5
90. Coelho RF et al (2009) Robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy: a review of current outcomes. BJU Int 104(10):1428-35
91. Coelho RF et al (2010) Retropubic, laparoscopic, and robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: a critical review of outcomes reported by highvolume centers. J Endourol 24(12):2003-15
92. Rassweiler J, Hruza M, Klein J, Goezen AS, Leber D (2010) The role of laparoscopic radical prostatectomy in the era of robotic surgery. European Urology, Supplements 9(3):379-87
93. Okamura AM (2009) Haptic feedback in robot-assisted minimally invasive surgery. Curr Opin Urol 19(1):102-7
94. Lawson EH, Curet MJ, Sanchez BR, Schuster R, Berguer R (2007) Postural ergonomics during robotic and laparoscopic gastric bypass surgery: a pilot project. J Robot Surg 1(1):61-8
95. Council NHaMR (2009) NHMRC additional levels of evidence and grades for recommendations for developers of guidelines
96. Collins S, Tulikangas P (2010) Randomized trials in robotic surgery: a practical impossibility? Int Urogynecol J 21(9):1045-7
97. Murphy D (2008) Robotic technology in surgery: current status in 2008. ANZ J Surg 78(5):1076-1081