Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress 2023 EHA Congress 2023 ASCO Annual Meeting
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

A round-up of the ONWARDS phase 3 clinical trials evaluating the novel weekly insulin icodec in people with diabetes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Gynecological Surgery
Published in: Gynecological Surgery 1/2017

Open Access 01-12-2017 | Original Article

Perioperative surgical outcome of conventional and robot-assisted total laparoscopic hysterectomy

Authors: W. J. van Weelden, B. B. M. Gordon, E. A. Roovers, A. A. Kraayenbrink, C. I. M. Aalders, F. Hartog, F. P. H. L. J. Dijkhuizen

Published in: Gynecological Surgery | Issue 1/2017

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

To evaluate surgical outcome in a consecutive series of patients with conventional and robot assisted total laparoscopic hysterectomy.

Methods

A retrospective cohort study was performed among patients with benign and malignant indications for a laparoscopic hysterectomy. Main surgical outcomes were operation room time and skin to skin operating time, complications, conversions, rehospitalisation and reoperation, estimated blood loss and length of hospital stay.

Results

A total of 294 patients were evaluated: 123 in the conventional total laparoscopic hysterectomy (TLH) group and 171 in the robot TLH group. After correction for differences in basic demographics with a multivariate linear regression analysis, the skin to skin operating time was a significant 18 minutes shorter in robot assisted TLH compared to conventional TLH (robot assisted TLH 92m, conventional TLH 110m, p0.001). The presence or absence of previous abdominal surgery had a significant influence on the skin to skin operating time as did the body mass index and the weight of the uterus.
Complications were not significantly different. The robot TLH group had significantly less blood loss and lower rehospitalisation and reoperation rates.

Conclusions

This study compares conventional TLH with robot assisted TLH and shows shorter operating times, less blood loss and lower rehospitalisation and reoperation rates in the robot TLH group.
Literature
1.
Spaner SJ, Warnock GL (1997) A brief history of endoscopy, laparoscopy and laparoscopic surgery. J laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A 7(6):369–373CrossRefPubMed
2.
Nieboer TE, Johnson N, Lethaby A, Tavender E, Curr E, Garry R, van Voorst S, Mol BWJ, Kluivers KB (2009) Surgical approach to hysterectomy for benign gynaecological disease. Cochrane Database of Syst Rev Issue 3. Art. No.: CD003677. doi:10.​1002/​14651858.​CD003677.​pub4
3.
ACOG (2015) Committee opinion no. 628: robotic surgery in gynecology. Obstet Gynecol 125(3):760–767CrossRef
4.
Wu JM, Wechter ME, Geller EJ, Nguyen TV, Visco AG (2007) Hysterectomy rates in the United States, 2003. Obstet Gynecol 110(5):1091–1095CrossRefPubMed
5.
Twijnstra ARH, Kolkman W, Trimbos-Kemper GC, Jansen FW (2010) Implementation of advanced laparoscopic surgery in gynecology: national overview of trends. J Minim Invasive Gyncol 17(4):487–492CrossRef
6.
Twijnstra AR, Blikkendaal MD, van Zwet EW, van Kesteren PJM, de Kroon CD, Jansen FW (2012) Predictors of successful surgical outcome in laparoscopic hysterectomy. Obstet Gynecol 119:700–708CrossRefPubMed
7.
Wright JD, Ananth CV, Lewin SN, Bruke WM, Lu YS, Al N, Herzog TJ, Hershman DL (2013) Robotically assisted vs laparoscopic hysterectomy among women with benign gynaecologic disease. JAMA 309(7):689–698CrossRefPubMed
8.
Driessen SR, Baden NL, van Zwet EW, Twijnstra AR, Jansen FW (2015) Trends in the implementation of advanced minimally invasive gynecologic surgical procedures in the Netherlands. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 22(4):642–647CrossRefPubMed
9.
Rosero EB, Kho KA, Joshi GP, Giesecke M, Schaffer JL (2014) Comparison of robotic and laparoscopic hysterectomy for benign gynecologic disease. Obstet Gynecol 123:255–262CrossRef
10.
Pasic RP, Rizzo JA, Fang H, Ross S, Moore M, Gunnarsson C (2010) Comparing robot-assisted with conventional laparoscopic hysterectomy: impact on cost and clinical outcomes. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 17:730–738CrossRefPubMed
11.
Lönnerfors C, Reynisson P, Persson J (2015) A randomized trial comparing vaginal and laparoscopic hysterectomy vs robot-assisted hysterectomy. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 22:78–86CrossRefPubMed
12.
13.
Kluivers KB, Hendriks JCM, Mol BWJ, Bongers MY, Bremer GL, de Vet HCW, Vierhout ME, Brolmann HAM (2007) Quality of life and surgical outcome after total laparoscopic hysterectomy versus total abdominal hysterectomy for benign disease: a randomized, controlled trial. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 14:145–152CrossRefPubMed
14.
15.
Garry R, Fountain J, Mason S, Hawe J, Napp V, Abbot J et al (2004) The eVALuate study: two parallel randomized trials, one comparing laparoscopic with abdominal hysterectomy, the other comparing laparoscopic with vaginal hysterectomy. BMJ 328:1229–1236CrossRef
16.
Orady M, Hrynewych A, Nawfal AK, Wegienka G (2012) Comparison of robotic-assisted hysterectomy to other minimally invasive approaches. JSLS 16(4):542–548CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
17.
Sarlos D, Kots L, Stevanovic N, Schaer G (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):92–96CrossRefPubMed
18.
Sarlos D, Kots L, Stevanovic N, von Felten S, Schär G (2012) Robotic compared with conventional laparoscopic hysterectomy: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol 120:604–11
19.
Paraiso MF, Ridgeway B, Park AJ, Jelovsek JE, Barber MD, Falcone T, Einarsson JL (2013) A randomized trial comparing conventional and robotically assisted total laparoscopic hysterectomy. Am J Obstet Gynecol 368:e1–e7
20.
Payne TN, Dauterive FR (2008) A comparison of total laparoscopic hysterectomy to robotically assisted hysterectomy: surgical outcomes in a community practice. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 15(3):286–291CrossRefPubMed
21.
Metadata
Title
Perioperative surgical outcome of conventional and robot-assisted total laparoscopic hysterectomy
Authors
W. J. van Weelden
B. B. M. Gordon
E. A. Roovers
A. A. Kraayenbrink
C. I. M. Aalders
F. Hartog
F. P. H. L. J. Dijkhuizen
Publication date
01-12-2017
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in
Gynecological Surgery / Issue 1/2017
Print ISSN: 1613-2076
Electronic ISSN: 1613-2084
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s10397-017-1008-2

Other articles of this Issue 1/2017

Gynecological Surgery 1/2017 Go to the issue

Original article

Dominant hand, non-dominant hand, or both? The effect of pre-training in hand-eye coordination upon the learning curve of laparoscopic intra-corporeal knot tying

Original Article

The effect of music in gynaecological office procedures on pain, anxiety and satisfaction: a randomized controlled trial

Letter to the Editor

Treating symptomatic uterine fibroids with myomectomy: current practice and views of UK consultants

Techniques and Instrumentation

An original and effective technique to improve exposure in open surgery

Original article

Incidence and predictors of failed second-generation endometrial ablation

Original article

Treating symptomatic uterine fibroids with myomectomy: current practice and views of UK consultants