Robot-assisted surgery in gynaecology

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Volumn 2014, Issue 12, 2014, Pages

  Liu, Hongqian ^a   Lawrie, Theresa A ^b   Lu, Donghao ^c   Song, Huan ^c   Wang, Lei ^d   Shi, Gang ^a  

^a SICHUAN UNIVERSITY   (China)

^b ROYAL UNITED HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

^c KAROLINSKA INSTITUTE   (Sweden)

^d SICHUAN UNIVERSITY   (China)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; BLOOD TRANSFUSION; CANCER SURGERY; COMPARATIVE EFFECTIVENESS; FEMALE; FEMALE GENITAL TRACT CANCER; GYNECOLOGIC SURGERY; HEALTH CARE COST; HOSPITAL READMISSION; HUMAN; LAPAROSCOPIC SURGERY; LENGTH OF STAY; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; OPERATION DURATION; OPERATIVE BLOOD LOSS; PATIENT SAFETY; PEROPERATIVE COMPLICATION; POSTOPERATIVE PAIN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITY OF LIFE; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL (TOPIC); REOPERATION; REVIEW; ROBOT ASSISTED SURGERY; SACROCOLPOPEXY; SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW; TREATMENT OUTCOME; GENITAL DISEASES, FEMALE; HYSTERECTOMY; LAPAROSCOPY; PROCEDURES; ROBOTIC SURGICAL PROCEDURE;

FEMALE; GENITAL DISEASES, FEMALE; GYNECOLOGIC SURGICAL PROCEDURES; HUMANS; HYSTERECTOMY; LAPAROSCOPY; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS AS TOPIC; ROBOTIC SURGICAL PROCEDURES;

EID: 84925222468     PISSN: 14651858     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD011422     Document Type: Review

References (121)

1. Anger J, Mueller E, Tarnay C, Brubaker L, Rosenman A, Smith B. Abdominal colpopexy: comparison of endoscopic surgical strategies. Journal of Urology. 2012 Annual Meeting of the American Urological Association, AUA Atlanta, GA United States. Conference Start: 20120519 Conference End: 20120523. Conference Publication:(var.pagings). 2012:e864.
2. Anger JT, Mueller ER, Tarnay C, Smith B, Stroupe K, Rosenman A, et al. Robotic compared with laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy: a randomized controlled trial. Obstetrics and Gynecology 2014;123(1):5-12.
3. Kenton K, Mueller E, Tarnay C, Brubaker L, Rosenman A, Smith B, et al. Comparative effectiveness of robotic and laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy for apical vaginal prolapse: one year outcomes. Journal of Urology Conference: 2013 Annual Meeting of the American Urological Association, AUA San Diego, CA United States. Conference Start: 20130504 Conference End: 20130508. Conference Publication:(var.pagings). 2013:e877-8.
4. Mueller ER, Kenton K, Tarnay C, Brubaker L, Rosenman A, Smith B, et al. Abdominal colpopexy: comparison of endoscopic surgical strategies (ACCESS). Contemporary Clinical Trials 2012;33(5):1011-8.
5. Tarnay C, Kenton K, Anger J, Bresee C, Brubaker L, Rosenman A, et al. Trocar site appearance one year after robotic vs. Laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy. Neurourology and Urodynamics Conference: Society for Urodynamics and Female Urology 2013 Winter Meeting Las Vegas, NV United States. Conference Start: 20130226 Conference End: 20130302. Conference Publication:(var.pagings). 2013:159.
6. Green JL, Deimling T, Tam T, Davies MF, Harkins GJ. A randomized controlled trial comparing conventional laparoscopic hysterectomy with robot-assisted laparoscopic hysterectomy in a teaching institution. Journal of Minimally Invasive Gynecology Conference: 42nd Global Congress of Minimally Invasive Gynecology, AAGL 2013 Washington, DC United States. Conference Start: 20131110 Conference End: 20131114. Conference Publication:(var.pagings). 2013:S4.
7. Harkins G. Study of conventional laparoscopic hysterectomy versus robot-assisted laparoscopic hysterectomy at a teaching institution. Clinicaltrials.gov 2012; Vol. http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01581905?term=NCT01581905&rank=1, issue accessed 4 July 2014.
8. Lonnerfors C, Reynisson P, Persson J. A randomized trial comparing vaginal- and laparoscopic hysterectomy to robot-assisted hysterectomy. Journal of Minimally Invasive Gynecology 2014;Jul 18:doi: 10.1016/j.jmig.2014.07.010. [Epub ahead of print].
9. Persson J. Robotic hysterectomy versus vaginal hysterectomy or traditional laparoscopic hysterectomy [NCT01865929]. Clinicaltrials.gov 2013.
10. Frick AC, Barber MD, Jelovsek JE, Fu Z, Chen G, Paraiso MR. Cost analysis of laparoscopic versus robotic sacrocolpopexy in a randomized controlled trial. Journal of Pelvic Medicine and Surgery 2011;17 Suppl 1(2):17. [: 37th Annual Scientific Meeting of the Society of Gynecologic Surgeons, SGS 2011 San Antonio, TX United States]
11. Paraiso M, Chen C, Jelovsek JE, Frick A, Barber MD. Conventional laparoscopic versus robotic-assisted laparoscopic sacral colpopexy: a randomized controlled trial. Journal of Pelvic Medicine and Surgery 2010;16 Suppl 2(5):58-9. [: 31st Annual Scientific Meeting of the American Urogynecologic Society, AUGS Long Beach, CA United States]
12. Paraiso MF, Chen CC, Jelovsek JE, Frick A, Barber MD. Conventional laparoscopic versus robotic-assisted laparoscopic sacral colpopexy: a randomized controlled trial. Journal of Minimally Invasive Gynecology 2010;17 Suppl 1(6):25. [: 39th Global Congress of Minimally Invasive Gynecology, AAGL 2010 Las Vegas, NV United States]
13. Paraiso MF, Jelovsek JE, Frick A, Chen CC, Barber MD. Laparoscopic compared with robotic sacrocolpopexy for vaginal prolapse: a randomized controlled trial. Obstetrics and Gynecology 2011;118(5):1005-13.
14. Paraiso MF, Jelovsek JE, Frick A, Chen CCG, Barber MD. Laparoscopic versus robotic-assisted laparoscopic sacral colpopexy: a randomized controlled trial. Neurourology and Urodynamics 2010;29(6):964-5. [: Joint Annual Meeting of the International Continence Society, ICS and International Urogynecological Association, IUGA Toronto, ON Canada]
15. Paraiso MF, Ridgeway B, Park AJ, Jelovsek JE, Barber MD, Falcone T, et al. A randomized trial comparing conventional and robotically assisted total laparoscopic hysterectomy. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology 2013;208(5):368.e361-368.e367.
16. Sarlos D, Kots L, Stevanovic N, von Felten S, Schar G. Robotic compared with conventional laparoscopic hysterectomy: a randomized controlled trial. Obstetrics and Gynecology 2012;3:604-11.
17. Sarlos D, Kots LV, Stevanovic N, Schar G. Robotic hysterectomy versus conventional laparoscopic hysterectomy: costs and preliminary results of a randomized controlled trial. Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics 2010;282 Suppl:11-2. [: 58th Congress of the German Society for Gynecology and Obstetrics (Deutsche Gesellschaft fur Gynakologie und Geburtshilfe, DGGG) Munich Germany]
18. Advincula AP, Xiao Xu, Goudeau S, Ransom SB. Robot-assisted laparoscopic myomectomy versus abdominal myomectomy: a comparison of short-term surgical outcomes and immediate costs. Journal of Minimally Invasive Gynecology 2007;14(6):698-705.
19. Bell MC, Torgerson J, Seshadri-Kreaden U, Suttle AW, Hunt S. Comparison of outcomes and cost for endometrial cancer staging via traditional laparotomy, standard laparoscopy and robotic techniques. Gynecologic Oncology 2008;111(3):407-11.
20. Boggess JF, Gehrig PA, Cantrell L, Shafer A, Ridgway M, Skinner EN, et al. A case-control study of robot-assisted type III radical hysterectomy with pelvic lymph node dissection compared with open radical hysterectomy. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology 2008;199(4):357.e1-7.
21. Boggess JF, Gehrig PA, Cantrell L, Shafer A, Ridgway M, Skinner EN, et al. A comparative study of 3 surgical methods for hysterectomy with staging for endometrial cancer: robotic assistance, laparoscopy, laparotomy. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology 2008;199(4):360.e1-9.
22. Campos LS, Limberger LF, Stein AT, Kalil AN. Postoperative pain and perioperative outcomes after laparoscopic radical hysterectomy and abdominal radical hysterectomy in patients with early cervical cancer: a randomised controlled trial. Trials 2013;14:293.
23. Cantrell LA, Mendivil A, Gehrig PA, Boggess JF. Survival outcomes for women undergoing type III robotic radical hysterectomy for cervical cancer: a 3-year experience. Gynecologic Oncology 2010;117(2):260-5.
24. Cardenas-Goicoechea J, Adams S, Bhat SB, Randall TC. Surgical outcomes of robotic-assisted surgical staging for endometrial cancer are equivalent to traditional laparoscopic staging at a minimally invasive surgical center. Gynecologic Oncology 2010;117(2):224-8. [PUBMED: 20144471]
25. Culligan PJ, Salamon C, Priestley JL, Scherer J, Shariati A. A double-blind randomized clinical trial comparing porcine dermis and polypropylene mesh for laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy. Journal of Pelvic Medicine and Surgery 2010;16 Suppl 2(5):93. [: 31st Annual Scientific Meeting of the American Urogynecologic Society, AUGS Long Beach, CA United States]
26. DeNardis SA, Holloway RW, Bigsby GE 4th, Pikaart DP, Ahmad S, Finkler NJ. Robotically assisted laparoscopic hysterectomy versus total abdominal hysterectomy and lymphadenectomy for endometrial cancer. Gynecologic Oncology 2008;111(3):412-7. [PUBMED: 18834620]
27. Desille-Gbaguidi H, Hebert T, Paternotte-Villemagne J, Gaborit C, Rush E, Body G. Overall care cost comparison between robotic and laparoscopic surgery for endometrial and cervical cancer. European Journal of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Reproductive Biology 2013;171(2):348-52.
28. Estape R, Lambrou N, Diaz R, Estape E, Dunkin N, Rivera A. A case matched analysis of robotic radical hysterectomy with lymphadenectomy compared with laparoscopy and laparotomy. Gynecologic Oncology 2009;113(3):357-61. [PUBMED: 19345987]
29. Gehrig PA, Cantrell LA, Shafer A, Abaid LN, Mendivil A, Boggess JF. What is the optimal minimally invasive surgical procedure for endometrial cancer staging in the obese and morbidly obese woman?. Gynecologic Oncology 2008;111(1):41-5.
30. Geisler JP, Orr CJ, Khurshid N, Phibbs G, Manahan KJ. Robotically assisted laparoscopic radical hysterectomy compared with open radical hysterectomy. International Journal of Gynecological Cancer 2010;20(3):438-42. [PUBMED: 20375811]
31. Gocmen A, Sanlikan F, Ucar MG. Comparison of robotic-assisted laparoscopic myomectomy outcomes with laparoscopic myomectomy. Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics 2013;287(1):91-6.
32. Grias I, Della Badia C. Interrupted vicryl suture vs. barbed suture and vaginal cuffcomplications after robotic hysterectomy. Journal of Minimally Invasive Gynecology Conference: 41st Global Congress of Minimally Invasive Gynecology, AAGL Las Vegas, NV United States. Conference Start: 20121105 Conference End: 20121109. Conference Publication:(var.pagings): S38. 2012.
33. Hoekstra AV, Jairam-Thodla A, Rademaker A, Singh DK, Buttin BM, Lurain JR, et al. The impact of robotics on practice management of endometrial cancer: transitioning from traditional surgery. The International Journal of Medical Robotics and Computer Assisted Surgery 2009;5(4):392-7. [PUBMED: 19455550]
34. Jung YW, Lee DW, Kim SW, Nam EJ, Kim JH, Kim JW, et al. Robot-assisted staging using three robotic arms for endometrial cancer: comparison to laparoscopy and laparotomy at a single institution. Journal of Surgical Oncology 2010;101(2):116-21. [PUBMED: 19902479]
35. Kho R. A trial on laparoscopic hysterectomy versus robotic hysterectomy [NCT00895284]. Clinicaltrials.gov 2009; Vol. trial terminated due to lack of funding.
36. Ko EM, Muto MG, Berkowitz RS, Feltmate CM. Robotic versus open radical hysterectomy: a comparative study at a single institution. Gynecologic Oncology 2008;111(3):425-30. [PUBMED: 18929400]
37. Lambaudie E, Houvenaeghel G, Walz J, Bannier M, Buttarelli M, Gurriet B, et al. Robot-assisted laparoscopy in gynecologic oncology. Surgical Endoscopy 2008;22(12):2743-7.
38. Lambaudie E, Narducci F, Bannier M, Jauffret C, Pouget N, Leblanc E, et al. Role of robot-assisted laparoscopy in adjuvant surgery for locally advanced cervical cancer. European Journal of Surgical Oncology 2010;36(4):409-13. [PUBMED: 20079599]
39. Lonnerfors C, Persson J. Robot-assisted laparoscopic myomectomy: a feasible technique for removal of unfavorably localized myomas. Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica 2009;88(9):994-9.
40. Maggioni A, Minig L, Zanagnolo V, Peiretti M, Sanguineti F, Bocciolone L, et al. Robotic approach for cervical cancer: comparison with laparotomy: a case control study. Gynecologic Oncology 2009;115(1):60-4. [PUBMED: 19638333]
41. Magrina JF, Kho RM, Weaver AL, Montero RP, Magtibay PM. Robotic radical hysterectomy: comparison with laparoscopy and laparotomy. Gynecologic Oncology 2008;109(1):86-91.
42. Martinez-Maestre MA, Gambadauro P, Gonzalez-Cejudo C, Torrejon R. Total laparoscopic hysterectomy with and without robotic assistance: a prospective controlled study. Surgical Innovation 2014;21(3):250-5.
43. McNanley A, Perevich M, Glantz C, Duecy EE, Flynn MK, Buchsbaum G. Bowel function after minimally invasive urogynecologic surgery: a prospective randomized controlled trial. Female Pelvic Medicine & Reconstructive Surgery 2012;18(2):82-5.
44. Nezhat FR, Datta MS, Liu C, Chuang L, Zakashansky K. Robotic radical hysterectomy versus total laparoscopic radical hysterectomy with pelvic lymphadenectomy for treatment of early cervical cancer. Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons 2008;12(3):227-37.
45. Palmer MM, Dahlman M, Eisenstein D, Theoharis E, Fisher J, Wegienka G. Outcomes of vaginal cuffclosure techniques in robotic hysterectomy: a prospective randomized trial. In: Journal of Minimally Invasive Gynecology. Conference: 42nd Global Congress of Minimally Invasive Gynecology, AAGL 2013 Washington, DC United States. Conference Start: 20131110 Conference End: 20131114. Conference Publication:(var.pagings):S33. 2013.
46. Persson J, Reynisson P, Borgfeldt C, Kannisto P, Lindahl B, Bossmar T. Robot assisted laparoscopic radical hysterectomy and pelvic lymphadenectomy with short and long term morbidity data. Gynecologic Oncology 2009;113(2):185-90. [PUBMED: 19251308]
47. Ramirez PT. Robotic radical hysterectomy: a new standard of care?. Future Oncology 2009;5(1):23-5.
48. Reza M, Maeso S, Blasco JA, Andradas E. Meta-analysis of observational studies on the safety and effectiveness of robotic gynaecological surgery. The British Journal of Surgery 2010;97(12):1772-83.
49. Seamon LG, Cohn DE, Henretta MS, Kim KH, Carlson MJ, Phillips GS, et al. Minimally invasive comprehensive surgical staging for endometrial cancer: robotics or laparoscopy?. Gynecologic Oncology 2009;113(1):36-41. [PUBMED: 19168206]
50. Seamon LG, Bryant SA, Rheaume PS, Kimball KJ, Huh WK, Fowler JM, et al. Comprehensive surgical staging for endometrial cancer in obese patients: comparing robotics and laparotomy. Obstetrics and Gynecology 2009;114(1):16-21. [PUBMED: 19546753]
51. Sert B, Abeler V. Robotic radical hysterectomy in early-stage cervical carcinoma patients, comparing results with total laparoscopic radical hysterectomy cases. The future is now?. The International Journal of Medical Robotics and Computer Assisted Surgery 2007;3(3):224-8.
52. Sert MB. Robot assisted laparoscopic radical hysterectomy and pelvic lymphadenectomy with short and long term morbidity. Gynecologic Oncology 2009; Vol. 115, issue 1:164-5; author reply 165-6. [PUBMED: 19539356]
53. Sert MB. Comparison between robot-assisted laparoscopic radical hysterectomy (RRH) and abdominal radical hysterectomy (ARH): a case control study from EIO/Milan. Gynecologic Oncology 2010;117(2):389.
54. Veljovich DS, Paley PJ, Drescher CW, Everett EN, Shah C, Peters WA III. Robotic surgery in gynecologic oncology: program initiation and outcomes after the first year with comparison with laparotomy for endometrial cancer staging. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology 2008;198(6):679.e1-10.
55. Kjölhede P. RCT comparing robot assisted laparoscopic hysterectomy to abdominal hysterectomy in endometrial cancer [NCT01526655]. Clinicaltrials.gov 2012.
56. Soto E. Laparoscopy vs. robotic surgery for endometriosis (LAROSE): a prospective randomized controlled trial [NCT01556204]. Clinicaltrials.gov 2012.
57. Narducci F. Perioperative morbidity in gyneco-oncology according to the procedure: coelioscopy vs robot-assisted coelioscopy [NCT01247779]. Clinicaltrials.gov 2010.
58. Obermair A, Gebski V, Frumovitz M, Soliman PT, Schmeler KM, Levenback C. A phase III randomized clinical trial comparing laparoscopic or robotic radical hysterectomy with abdominal radical hysterectomy in patients with early stage cervical cancer [NCT00614211]. Journal of Minimally Invasive Gynecology 2008;15(5):584-8.
59. Falconer H. Robotic versus abdominal surgery for endometrial cancer (RASHEC) [NCT01847703]. Clinicaltrials.gov 2013.
60. Advincula AP, Song A, Burke W, Reynolds RK. Preliminary experience with robot-assisted laparoscopic myomectomy. The Journal of the American Association of Gynecologic Laparoscopists 2004;11:511-8.
61. Bell MC, Torgerson JL, Kreaden U. The first 100 da Vinci hysterectomies:an analysis of the learning curve for a single surgeon. S D Med 2009;62(91):93-5.
62. Cadiere GB, Himpens J, Germay O, Izizaw R, Degueldre M, Vandromme J, et al. Feasibility of robotic laparoscopic surgery: 146 cases. World Journal of Surgery 2001;25:1467-77.
63. Cela V, Freschi L, Simi G, Tana R, Russo N, Artini PG, et al. Fertility and endocrine outcome after robot-assisted laparoscopic myomectomy (RALM). Gynecological Endocrinology 2013;29(1):79-82.
64. Cho JE, Nezhat FR. Robotics and gynecologic oncology: review of the literature. Journal of Minimally Invasive Gynecology 2009;16(6):669-81.
65. Coronado PJ, Herraiz MA, Magrina JF, Fasero M, Vidart JA. Comparison of perioperative outcomes and cost of robotic-assisted laparoscopy, laparoscopy and laparotomy for endometrial cancer. European Journal of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Reproductive Biology 2012;165(2):289-94.
66. Intuitive Surgical Inc. The da Vinci surgery experience. http://www.davincisurgery.com/(accessed 25 June 2014).
67. Degueldre M, Vandromme J, Huong PT, Cadiere GB. Robotically assisted laparoscopic microsurgical tubal reanastomosis: a feasibility study. Fertility and Sterility 2000;74:1020-3.
68. DerSimonian R, Laird N. Meta-analysis in clinical trials. Controlled Clinical Trials 1986;7:177-88.
69. Dharia Patel SP, Steinkampf MP, Whitten SJ, Malizia BA. Robotic tubal anastomosis: surgical technique and cost effectiveness. Fertility and Sterility 2008;90:1175-9.
70. Diaz JP, Sonoda Y, Leitao MM, Zivanovic O, Brown CL, Chi DS, et al. Oncologic outcome of fertility-sparing radical trachelectomy versus radical hysterectomy for stage IB1 cervical carcinoma. Gynecologic Oncology 2008;111(2):255-60.
71. Sarlos D, Kots L, Stevanovic N, Schaer G. Robotic hysterectomy versus conventional laparoscopic hysterectomy: outcome and cost analyses of a matched case-control study. European Journal of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Reproductive Biology 2010;150:92-6.
72. Falcone T, Goldberg JM, Margossian H, Stevens L. Robotic-assisted laparoscopic microsurgical tubal anastomosis: a human pilot study. Fertility and Sterility 2000;73(5):1040-2.
73. Fanning J, Fenton B, Purohit M. Robotic radical hysterectomy. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology 2008;198(6):649.e1-4.
74. Field JB, Benoit MF, Dinh TA, Diaz-Arrastia C. Computer-enhanced robotic surgery in gynecologic oncology. Surgical Endoscopy 2007;21(2):244-6.
75. Finger TN, Nezhat FR. Robotic-assisted fertility-sparing surgery for early ovarian cancer. Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons 2014;18(2):308-13.
76. Galaal K, Bryant A, Fisher AD, Al-Khaduri M, Kew F, Lopes AD. Laparoscopy versus laparotomy for the management of early stage endometrial cancer. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2012, Issue 9. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD006655.pub2]
77. Geisler JP, Orr CJ, Manahan KJ. Robotically assisted total laparoscopic radical trachelectomy for fertility sparing in stage IB1 adenosarcoma of the cervix. Journal of Laparoendoscopic & Advanced Surgical Techniques. Part A 2008;18(5):727-9.
78. GRADEpro [Computer program]. Jan Brozek, Andrew Oxman, Holger Schünemann. Version 3.6 for Windows 2008.
79. Hemal AK, Kolla SB, Wadhwa P. Robotic reconstruction for recurrent supratriginal vesicovaginal fistulas. Journal of Urology 2008;180:981-5.
80. Higgins JPT, Green S, editors. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0 [updated March 2011]. The Cochrane Collaboration, 2011. www.cochrane-handbook.org.
81. Holloway RW, Patel SD, Ahmad S. Robotic surgery in gynecology. Scandinavian Journal of Surgery 2009;98(2):96-109.
82. Holloway RW, Ahmad S, DeNardis SA, Peterson LB, Sultana N, Bigsby GE 4th, et al. Robotic-assisted laparoscopic hysterectomy and lymphadenectomy for endometrial cancer: analysis of surgical performance. Gynecologic Oncology 2009;115(3):447-52.
83. The Hysterectomy Association. Hysterectomy statistics-an infographic for the UK. http://www.hysterectomy-association.org.uk/latest-news/hysterectomy-statistics-an-infographic-for-the-uk/2013 (accessed 6 August 2014).
84. Jemal A, Bray F, Center MM, Ferlay J, Ward E, Forman D. Global cancer statistics. CA Cancer J Clin 2011;61(2):69-90.
85. Jeppson PC, Rahimi S, Gattoc L, Westermann L, Cichowski S, Raker CA, et al. Impact of robotic technology on hysterectomy route and associated implications for resident education. Journal of Minimally Invasive Gynecology Conference: 40th Annual SGS Scientific Meeting Scottsdale, AZ United States. Conference Start: 20140323 Conference End: 20140326. Conference Publication:(var.pagings):S4. 2014.
86. Kilgore JE, Jackson AL, Ko EM, Soper JT, Van Le L, Gehrig PA, et al. Recurrence-free and 5-year survival following robotic-assisted surgical staging for endometrial carcinoma. Gynecologic Oncology 2013;129(1):49-53.
87. Kim YT, Kim SW, Hyung WJ, Lee SJ, Nam EJ, Lee WJ. Robotic radical hysterectomy with pelvic lymphadenectomy for cervical carcinoma: a pilot study. Gynecologic Oncology 2008;108(2):312-6.
88. Kucukmetin A, Biliatis I, Naik R, Bryant A. Laparoscopically assisted radical vaginal hysterectomy versus radical abdominal hysterectomy for the treatment of early cervical cancer. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2013, Issue 10. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD006651.pub3]
89. Lawrie TA, Medeiros LRF, Rosa DD, da Rosa MI, Edelweiss MI, Stein AT, et al. Laparoscopy versus laparotomy for FIGO stage I ovarian cancer. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2013, Issue 2. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD005344.pub3]
90. Lenihan JP, Kovanda C, Sheshadri-Kreaden U. What is the learning curve for robotic assisted gynaecologic surgery?. Journal of Minimally Invasive Gynecology 2008;15:589-94.
91. Lowe MP, Chamberlain DH, Kamelle SA, Johnson PR, Tillmanns TD. A multi-institutional experience with robotic-assisted radical hysterectomy for early stage cervical cancer. Gynecologic Oncology 2009;113(2):191-4.
92. Madhuri TK, Hamzawala I, Tailor A, Butler-Manuel S. Robot assisted surgery in gynaecologic oncology-starting a program and initial learning curve from a UK tertiary referral centre: the Guildford perspective. The International Journal of Medical Robotics and Computer Assisted Surgery: MRCAS 2012;8(4):496-503.
93. Medeiros LRF, Rosa DD, Bozzetti MC, Fachel JMG, Furness S, Garry R, et al. Laparoscopy versus laparotomy for benign ovarian tumour. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2009, Issue 2. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD004751.pub3;:]
94. Melamud O, Eichel L, Turbow B, Shanberg A. Laparoscopic vesicovaginal fistula repair with robotic reconstruction. Urology 2005;65:163-6.
95. Mettler L, Ibrahim M, Jonat W. One year of experience working with the aid of a robotic assistant (the voice-controlled optic holder AESOP) in gynaecological endoscopic surgery. Human Reproduction 1998;3(10):2748-50.
96. Moy ML, Byun SY. Role of robotic surgery in urogynecologic surgery. Current Opinion in Urology 2010;20(1):70-4.
97. Nezhat C, Saberi NS, Shahmohamady B, Nezhat F. Robotic-assisted laparoscopy in gynecological surgery. Journal of Strategic Information Systems 2006;10:317-20.
98. Nezhat C, Lavie O, Hsu S, Watson J, Barnett O, Lemyre M. Robotic assisted laparoscopic myomectomy compared with standard laparoscopic myomectomy-a retrospective matched control study. Fertility and Sterility 2009;91:556-9.
99. Nieboer TE, Aarts JW. Robotic compared with laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy: a randomized controlled trial. Obstetrics and Gynecology 2014;123(6):1357-8.
100. O'Neill M, Moran PS, Teljeur C, O'Sullivan OE, O'Reilly BA, Hewitt M, et al. Robot-assisted hysterectomy compared to open and laparoscopic approaches: systematic review and meta-analysis. [Review]. Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics 2013;287(5):907-18.
101. Parmar MK, Torri V, Stewart L. Extracting summary statistics to perform meta-analyses of the published literature for survival endpoints. Statistics in Medicine 1998;17(24):2815-34.
102. Persson J, Kannisto P, Bossmar T. Robot-assisted abdominal laparoscopic radical trachelectomy. Gynecologic Oncology 2008;111(3):564-7.
103. Plante M. Vaginal radical trachelectomy: an update. Gynecologic Oncology 2008;111 Suppl 1(2):105-10.
104. Ramsey C, Pickard R, Robertson C, Close A, Vale L, Armstrong N, et al. Systematic review and economic modelling of the relative clinical benefit and cost-effectiveness of laparoscopic surgery and robotic surgery for removal of the prostate in men with localised prostate cancer. NIHR Health Technology Assessment programme: Executive Summaries 2012;16(41):1-313.
105. The Nordic Cochrane Centre, The Cochrane Collaboration. Review Manager (RevMan). 5.3. Copenhagen: The Nordic Cochrane Centre, The Cochrane Collaboration, 2014.
106. Reynisson P, Persson J. Hospital costs for robot-assisted laparoscopic radical hysterectomy and pelvic lymphadenectomy. Gynecologic Oncology 2013;130(1):95-9.
107. Reynolds RK, Burke WM, Advincula AP. Preliminary experience with robot-assisted laparoscopic staging of gynecologic malignancies. Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons/Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons 2005;9(2):149-58.
108. Reynolds RK, Advincula AP. Robot-assisted laparoscopic hysterectomy: technique and initial experience. American Journal of Surgery 2006;191:555-60.
109. Rodgers AK, Goldberg JM, Hammel JP, Falcone T. Tubalanastomosis by robotic compared with outpatient minilaparotomy. Obstetrics and Gynecology 2007;109:1375-80.
110. Schiavone M, Kuo E, Naumann R, Burke W, Lewin S, Herzog T, et al. The commercialization of robotic surgery: unsubstantiated marketing of gynecologic surgery by hospitals. Gynecol Oncol. Conference: 2012 Annual Meeting on Women's Cancer Austin, TX United States. Conference Start: 20120324 Conference End: 20120327. Conference Publication:(var.pagings):772. 2012.
111. Schimpf MO, Morgenstern JH, Tulikangas PK, Wagner JR. Vesicovaginal fistula repair without intentional cystotomy using the laparoscopic robotic approach: a case report. Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons 2007;11:378-80.
112. Sener A, Chew BH, Duvdevani M, Brock GB, Vilos GA, Pautler SE. Combined transurethral and laparoscopic partial cystectomy and robot-assisted bladder repair for the treatment of bladder endometrioma. Journal of Minimally Invasive Gynecology 2006;13:245-8.
113. Shafer A, Boggess JF. Robotic-assisted endometrial cancer staging and radical hysterectomy with the da Vinci surgical system. Gynecologic Oncology 2008;111 Suppl(2):18-23.
114. Soliman PT, Langley G, Munsell MF, Vaniya HA, Frumovitz M, Ramirez PT. Analgesic and antiemetic requirements after minimally invasive surgery for early cervical cancer: a comparison between laparoscopy and robotic surgery. Annals of Surgical Oncology 2013;20(4):1355-9.
115. Sundaram BM, Kalidasan G, Hemal AK. Robotic repair of vesicovaginal fistula: case series of five patients. Urology 2006;67:970-3.
116. Teljeur C, O'Neill M, Moran P, Harrington P, Flattery M, Murphy L, et al. Economic evaluation of robot-assisted hysterectomy: a cost-minimisation analysis. BJOG 2014 May 9; Vol. Epub ahead of print.
117. Vergote I, Pouseele B, Van Gorp T, Vanacker B, Leunen K, Cadron I, et al. Robotic retroperitoneal lower para-aortic lymphadenectomy in cervical carcinoma: first report on the technique used in 5 patients. Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica 2008;87(7):783-7.
118. Verheijen R, Zweemer R. Robotic surgery for gynaecologic cancer: an overview. Current Oncology Reports 2012;14(6):544-9.
119. Yim GW, Kim SW, Nam EJ, Kim S, Kim YT. Learning curve analysis of robot-assisted radical hysterectomy for cervical cancer: initial experience at a single institution. Journal of Gynecologic Oncology 2013;24(4):303-12.
120. Liu H, Lu D, Wang L, Shi G, Song H, Clarke J. Robotic surgery for benign gynaecological disease. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2012, Issue 2. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD008978.pub2]
121. Lu D, Liu Z, Shi G, Liu D, Zhou X. Robotic assisted surgery for gynaecological cancer. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2012, Issue 1. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD008640.pub2]