Cargando…

Perioperative Outcomes of Robotic Assisted Laparoscopic Surgery Versus Conventional Laparoscopy Surgery for Advanced-Stage Endometriosis

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: To determine perioperative outcome differences in patients undergoing robotic-assisted laparoscopic surgery (RALS) versus conventional laparoscopic surgery (CLS) for advanced-stage endometriosis. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study at a minimally invasive gynecologic...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Nezhat, Farr R., Sirota, Ido
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons 2014
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4254472/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25489208
http://dx.doi.org/10.4293/JSLS.2014.00094
_version_ 1782347344673505280
author Nezhat, Farr R.
Sirota, Ido
author_facet Nezhat, Farr R.
Sirota, Ido
author_sort Nezhat, Farr R.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: To determine perioperative outcome differences in patients undergoing robotic-assisted laparoscopic surgery (RALS) versus conventional laparoscopic surgery (CLS) for advanced-stage endometriosis. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study at a minimally invasive gynecologic surgery center at 2 academically affiliated, urban, nonprofit hospitals included all patients treated by either robotic-assisted or conventional laparoscopic surgery for stage III or IV endometriosis (American Society for Reproductive Medicine criteria) between July 2009 and October 2012 by 1 surgeon experienced in both techniques. The main outcome measures were extent of surgery, estimated blood loss, operating room time, intraoperative and postoperative complications, and length of stay, with medians for continuous measures and distributions for categorical measures, stratified by body mass index values. Robotically assisted laparoscopy and conventional laparoscopy were then compared by use of the Wilcoxon rank sum, χ(2), or Fisher exact test, as appropriate. RESULTS: Among 86 conventional laparoscopic and 32 robotically assisted cases, the latter had a higher body mass index (27.36 kg/m(2) [range, 23.90–34.09 kg/m(2)] versus 24.53 kg/m(2) [range, 22.27–26.96 kg/m(2)]; P < .0079) and operating room time (250.50 minutes [range, 176–328.50 minutes] versus 173.50 minutes [range, 123–237 minutes]; P < .0005) than did conventional laparoscopy patients. After body mass index stratification, obese patients varied in operating room time (282.5 minutes [range, 224–342 minutes] for robotic-assisted laparoscopy versus 174 minutes [range, 130–270 minutes] for conventional laparoscopy; P < .05). No other significant differences were noted between the robotic-assisted and conventional laparoscopy groups. CONCLUSION: Despite a higher operating room time, robotic-assisted laparoscopy appears to be a safe minimally invasive approach for patients, with all other perioperative outcomes, including intraoperative and postoperative complications, comparable with those in patients undergoing conventional laparoscopy.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4254472
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2014
publisher Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-42544722014-12-08 Perioperative Outcomes of Robotic Assisted Laparoscopic Surgery Versus Conventional Laparoscopy Surgery for Advanced-Stage Endometriosis Nezhat, Farr R. Sirota, Ido JSLS Scientific Papers BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: To determine perioperative outcome differences in patients undergoing robotic-assisted laparoscopic surgery (RALS) versus conventional laparoscopic surgery (CLS) for advanced-stage endometriosis. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study at a minimally invasive gynecologic surgery center at 2 academically affiliated, urban, nonprofit hospitals included all patients treated by either robotic-assisted or conventional laparoscopic surgery for stage III or IV endometriosis (American Society for Reproductive Medicine criteria) between July 2009 and October 2012 by 1 surgeon experienced in both techniques. The main outcome measures were extent of surgery, estimated blood loss, operating room time, intraoperative and postoperative complications, and length of stay, with medians for continuous measures and distributions for categorical measures, stratified by body mass index values. Robotically assisted laparoscopy and conventional laparoscopy were then compared by use of the Wilcoxon rank sum, χ(2), or Fisher exact test, as appropriate. RESULTS: Among 86 conventional laparoscopic and 32 robotically assisted cases, the latter had a higher body mass index (27.36 kg/m(2) [range, 23.90–34.09 kg/m(2)] versus 24.53 kg/m(2) [range, 22.27–26.96 kg/m(2)]; P < .0079) and operating room time (250.50 minutes [range, 176–328.50 minutes] versus 173.50 minutes [range, 123–237 minutes]; P < .0005) than did conventional laparoscopy patients. After body mass index stratification, obese patients varied in operating room time (282.5 minutes [range, 224–342 minutes] for robotic-assisted laparoscopy versus 174 minutes [range, 130–270 minutes] for conventional laparoscopy; P < .05). No other significant differences were noted between the robotic-assisted and conventional laparoscopy groups. CONCLUSION: Despite a higher operating room time, robotic-assisted laparoscopy appears to be a safe minimally invasive approach for patients, with all other perioperative outcomes, including intraoperative and postoperative complications, comparable with those in patients undergoing conventional laparoscopy. Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons 2014 /pmc/articles/PMC4254472/ /pubmed/25489208 http://dx.doi.org/10.4293/JSLS.2014.00094 Text en © 2014 by JSLS, Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial No Derivatives License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/us/), which permits for noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited and is not altered in any way.
spellingShingle Scientific Papers
Nezhat, Farr R.
Sirota, Ido
Perioperative Outcomes of Robotic Assisted Laparoscopic Surgery Versus Conventional Laparoscopy Surgery for Advanced-Stage Endometriosis
title Perioperative Outcomes of Robotic Assisted Laparoscopic Surgery Versus Conventional Laparoscopy Surgery for Advanced-Stage Endometriosis
title_full Perioperative Outcomes of Robotic Assisted Laparoscopic Surgery Versus Conventional Laparoscopy Surgery for Advanced-Stage Endometriosis
title_fullStr Perioperative Outcomes of Robotic Assisted Laparoscopic Surgery Versus Conventional Laparoscopy Surgery for Advanced-Stage Endometriosis
title_full_unstemmed Perioperative Outcomes of Robotic Assisted Laparoscopic Surgery Versus Conventional Laparoscopy Surgery for Advanced-Stage Endometriosis
title_short Perioperative Outcomes of Robotic Assisted Laparoscopic Surgery Versus Conventional Laparoscopy Surgery for Advanced-Stage Endometriosis
title_sort perioperative outcomes of robotic assisted laparoscopic surgery versus conventional laparoscopy surgery for advanced-stage endometriosis
topic Scientific Papers
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4254472/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25489208
http://dx.doi.org/10.4293/JSLS.2014.00094
work_keys_str_mv AT nezhatfarrr perioperativeoutcomesofroboticassistedlaparoscopicsurgeryversusconventionallaparoscopysurgeryforadvancedstageendometriosis
AT sirotaido perioperativeoutcomesofroboticassistedlaparoscopicsurgeryversusconventionallaparoscopysurgeryforadvancedstageendometriosis