Skip to main content
Top
Published in: International Urogynecology Journal 11/2019

01-11-2019 | Sacrocolpopexy | Original Article

Robotic sacrocolpopexy: adverse events reported to the FDA over the last decade

Authors: Colby Souders, Farnoosh Nik-Ahd, Hanson Zhao, Karyn Eilber, Bilal Chugtai, Jennifer Anger

Published in: International Urogynecology Journal | Issue 11/2019

Login to get access

Abstract

Introduction and hypothesis

As surgeons increase the volume of robotic abdominal sacrocolpopexies (rASCs) and become more experienced, a subsequent decrease in the number of adverse events is expected over time. Further, as the leading manufacturer of the operative robot (Intuitive Surgical) improves the technology, adverse events should also decrease. We hypothesized that there has been a decrease in adverse event reporting for rASCs and that serious adverse events are rare.

Methods

We performed a search of the FDA Manufacturer and User Facility Device Experience (MAUDE) database. All entries with the manufacturer “Intuitive Surgical” were exported from 2007 to 2017. All entries with “sacrocolpopexy” were then isolated and analyzed.

Results

The number of adverse events reported for rASC peaked in 2013 and 2014, at 107 and 124 respectively. In 2015 and 2016, the number dropped to 11 and 7 respectively. There were 334 reported adverse events from 2007 to 2017. Five (1.50%) were categorized as death, 33 (9.88%) as injury, and 296 (88.62%) as malfunction. Analysis of the malfunction reports found that 15 out of 296 (5.07%) were converted to open surgery, 4 out of 296 (1.3%) were converted to laparoscopic surgery, 4 out of 296 (1.3%) cases were aborted, and 6 out of 296 (2.03%) malfunctions resulted in patient injury.

Conclusions

Although the MAUDE database has its limitations, it does indicate that the number of adverse events reported for rASC peaked in 2013 and 2014 and has decreased annually since then. This may be due to improved proficiency of the surgeon and surgical team, in addition to improvements in the robot. When malfunctions do occur, they infrequently cause serious injury or have an impact on surgical approach.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Wu JM, Hundley AF, Fulton RG, et al. Forecasting the prevalence of pelvic floor disorders in U.S. women: 2010 to 2050. Obstet Gynecol. 2009;114:1278.CrossRef Wu JM, Hundley AF, Fulton RG, et al. Forecasting the prevalence of pelvic floor disorders in U.S. women: 2010 to 2050. Obstet Gynecol. 2009;114:1278.CrossRef
2.
go back to reference Kurkijarvi K, Aaltonen R, Gissler M, et al. Pelvic organ prolapse surgery in Finland from 1987 to 2009: a national register based study. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2017;214:71.CrossRef Kurkijarvi K, Aaltonen R, Gissler M, et al. Pelvic organ prolapse surgery in Finland from 1987 to 2009: a national register based study. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2017;214:71.CrossRef
3.
go back to reference Nygaard IE, McCreery R, Brubaker L, et al. Abdominal sacrocolpopexy: a comprehensive review. Obstet Gynecol. 2004;104:805.CrossRef Nygaard IE, McCreery R, Brubaker L, et al. Abdominal sacrocolpopexy: a comprehensive review. Obstet Gynecol. 2004;104:805.CrossRef
4.
go back to reference Hudson CO, Northington GM, Lyles RH, et al. Outcomes of robotic Sacrocolpopexy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Female Pelvic Med Reconstruct Surg. 2014;20:252.CrossRef Hudson CO, Northington GM, Lyles RH, et al. Outcomes of robotic Sacrocolpopexy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Female Pelvic Med Reconstruct Surg. 2014;20:252.CrossRef
5.
go back to reference Anger JT, Mueller ER, Tarnay C, et al. Robotic compared with laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol. 2014;123:5.CrossRef Anger JT, Mueller ER, Tarnay C, et al. Robotic compared with laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol. 2014;123:5.CrossRef
9.
go back to reference Andonian S, Okeke Z, Okeke DA, et al. Device failures associated with patient injuries during robot-assisted laparoscopic surgeries: a comprehensive review of FDA MAUDE database. Can J Urol. 2008;15:3912.PubMed Andonian S, Okeke Z, Okeke DA, et al. Device failures associated with patient injuries during robot-assisted laparoscopic surgeries: a comprehensive review of FDA MAUDE database. Can J Urol. 2008;15:3912.PubMed
10.
go back to reference Friedman DCW, Lendvay TS, Hannaford B. Instrument failures for the da Vinci Surgical system: a Food and Drug Administration MAUDE database study. Surg Endosc. 2013;27:1503.CrossRef Friedman DCW, Lendvay TS, Hannaford B. Instrument failures for the da Vinci Surgical system: a Food and Drug Administration MAUDE database study. Surg Endosc. 2013;27:1503.CrossRef
11.
go back to reference Sandberg JM, Gray I, Pearlman A, et al. An evaluation of the manufacturer and user facility device experience database that inspired the United States Food and Drug Administration’s reclassification of transvaginal mesh. Investigat Clin Urol. 2018;59:126.CrossRef Sandberg JM, Gray I, Pearlman A, et al. An evaluation of the manufacturer and user facility device experience database that inspired the United States Food and Drug Administration’s reclassification of transvaginal mesh. Investigat Clin Urol. 2018;59:126.CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Robotic sacrocolpopexy: adverse events reported to the FDA over the last decade
Authors
Colby Souders
Farnoosh Nik-Ahd
Hanson Zhao
Karyn Eilber
Bilal Chugtai
Jennifer Anger
Publication date
01-11-2019
Publisher
Springer International Publishing
Keyword
Sacrocolpopexy
Published in
International Urogynecology Journal / Issue 11/2019
Print ISSN: 0937-3462
Electronic ISSN: 1433-3023
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-018-3845-6

Other articles of this Issue 11/2019

International Urogynecology Journal 11/2019 Go to the issue