Cargando…

The comparison of gasless and traditional robot-assisted transvaginal natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery in hysterectomy

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To describe the surgical technique and compare the operative outcomes of gasless and traditional robot-assisted transvaginal natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (GR-vNOTES vs. TR-vNOTES) in hysterectomy. METHODS: The patients undergoing hysterectomy via GR-vNOTES or TR-v...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Mei, Youwen, He, Li, Zhang, Qiang, Chen, Ying, Zheng, Jiafeng, Xiao, Xinyu, Lin, Yonghong
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10019594/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36936202
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fmed.2023.1117158
_version_ 1784908056352522240
author Mei, Youwen
He, Li
Zhang, Qiang
Chen, Ying
Zheng, Jiafeng
Xiao, Xinyu
Lin, Yonghong
author_facet Mei, Youwen
He, Li
Zhang, Qiang
Chen, Ying
Zheng, Jiafeng
Xiao, Xinyu
Lin, Yonghong
author_sort Mei, Youwen
collection PubMed
description STUDY OBJECTIVE: To describe the surgical technique and compare the operative outcomes of gasless and traditional robot-assisted transvaginal natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (GR-vNOTES vs. TR-vNOTES) in hysterectomy. METHODS: The patients undergoing hysterectomy via GR-vNOTES or TR-vNOTES between February 2020 and January 2022 in our hospital were included. Clinical data regarding patient demographics, operative time, blood loss, complications, and postoperative hospital stays were collected and analyzed. RESULTS: Five cases underwent hysterectomy via GR-vNOTES, and nine cases via TR-vNOTES. The baseline demographics and operative outcomes were not significantly different in GR-vNOTES and TR-vNOTES groups. There was no conversion to multiport robotic laparoscopy, conventional laparoscopy or laparotomy. No complications were seen in both groups, except two cases had fever postoperatively in the TR-vNOTES group. For those with early stage cervical/endometrial cancer, no recurrence or metastasis was observed in the follow-up of six months. CONCLUSION: Both GR-vNOTES and TR-vNOTES were feasible and safe for hysterectomy. GR-vNOTES was a promising alternative to TR-vNOTES in hysterectomy.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10019594
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-100195942023-03-17 The comparison of gasless and traditional robot-assisted transvaginal natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery in hysterectomy Mei, Youwen He, Li Zhang, Qiang Chen, Ying Zheng, Jiafeng Xiao, Xinyu Lin, Yonghong Front Med (Lausanne) Medicine STUDY OBJECTIVE: To describe the surgical technique and compare the operative outcomes of gasless and traditional robot-assisted transvaginal natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (GR-vNOTES vs. TR-vNOTES) in hysterectomy. METHODS: The patients undergoing hysterectomy via GR-vNOTES or TR-vNOTES between February 2020 and January 2022 in our hospital were included. Clinical data regarding patient demographics, operative time, blood loss, complications, and postoperative hospital stays were collected and analyzed. RESULTS: Five cases underwent hysterectomy via GR-vNOTES, and nine cases via TR-vNOTES. The baseline demographics and operative outcomes were not significantly different in GR-vNOTES and TR-vNOTES groups. There was no conversion to multiport robotic laparoscopy, conventional laparoscopy or laparotomy. No complications were seen in both groups, except two cases had fever postoperatively in the TR-vNOTES group. For those with early stage cervical/endometrial cancer, no recurrence or metastasis was observed in the follow-up of six months. CONCLUSION: Both GR-vNOTES and TR-vNOTES were feasible and safe for hysterectomy. GR-vNOTES was a promising alternative to TR-vNOTES in hysterectomy. Frontiers Media S.A. 2023-03-02 /pmc/articles/PMC10019594/ /pubmed/36936202 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fmed.2023.1117158 Text en Copyright © 2023 Mei, He, Zhang, Chen, Zheng, Xiao and Lin. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
spellingShingle Medicine
Mei, Youwen
He, Li
Zhang, Qiang
Chen, Ying
Zheng, Jiafeng
Xiao, Xinyu
Lin, Yonghong
The comparison of gasless and traditional robot-assisted transvaginal natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery in hysterectomy
title The comparison of gasless and traditional robot-assisted transvaginal natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery in hysterectomy
title_full The comparison of gasless and traditional robot-assisted transvaginal natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery in hysterectomy
title_fullStr The comparison of gasless and traditional robot-assisted transvaginal natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery in hysterectomy
title_full_unstemmed The comparison of gasless and traditional robot-assisted transvaginal natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery in hysterectomy
title_short The comparison of gasless and traditional robot-assisted transvaginal natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery in hysterectomy
title_sort comparison of gasless and traditional robot-assisted transvaginal natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery in hysterectomy
topic Medicine
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10019594/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36936202
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fmed.2023.1117158
work_keys_str_mv AT meiyouwen thecomparisonofgaslessandtraditionalrobotassistedtransvaginalnaturalorificetransluminalendoscopicsurgeryinhysterectomy
AT heli thecomparisonofgaslessandtraditionalrobotassistedtransvaginalnaturalorificetransluminalendoscopicsurgeryinhysterectomy
AT zhangqiang thecomparisonofgaslessandtraditionalrobotassistedtransvaginalnaturalorificetransluminalendoscopicsurgeryinhysterectomy
AT chenying thecomparisonofgaslessandtraditionalrobotassistedtransvaginalnaturalorificetransluminalendoscopicsurgeryinhysterectomy
AT zhengjiafeng thecomparisonofgaslessandtraditionalrobotassistedtransvaginalnaturalorificetransluminalendoscopicsurgeryinhysterectomy
AT xiaoxinyu thecomparisonofgaslessandtraditionalrobotassistedtransvaginalnaturalorificetransluminalendoscopicsurgeryinhysterectomy
AT linyonghong thecomparisonofgaslessandtraditionalrobotassistedtransvaginalnaturalorificetransluminalendoscopicsurgeryinhysterectomy
AT meiyouwen comparisonofgaslessandtraditionalrobotassistedtransvaginalnaturalorificetransluminalendoscopicsurgeryinhysterectomy
AT heli comparisonofgaslessandtraditionalrobotassistedtransvaginalnaturalorificetransluminalendoscopicsurgeryinhysterectomy
AT zhangqiang comparisonofgaslessandtraditionalrobotassistedtransvaginalnaturalorificetransluminalendoscopicsurgeryinhysterectomy
AT chenying comparisonofgaslessandtraditionalrobotassistedtransvaginalnaturalorificetransluminalendoscopicsurgeryinhysterectomy
AT zhengjiafeng comparisonofgaslessandtraditionalrobotassistedtransvaginalnaturalorificetransluminalendoscopicsurgeryinhysterectomy
AT xiaoxinyu comparisonofgaslessandtraditionalrobotassistedtransvaginalnaturalorificetransluminalendoscopicsurgeryinhysterectomy
AT linyonghong comparisonofgaslessandtraditionalrobotassistedtransvaginalnaturalorificetransluminalendoscopicsurgeryinhysterectomy