Cargando…

Robotic single-site versus laparoendoscopic single-site hysterectomy: a propensity score matching study

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to compare the surgical outcomes of robotic single-site (RSS-H) and laparoendoscopic single-site total hysterectomy (LESS-H) and to evaluate the feasibility of RSS-H in patients with benign gynecologic disease. METHODS: The RSS-H was performed using the da Vinci...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Paek, Jiheum, Lee, Jung-Dong, Kong, Tae Wook, Chang, Suk-Joon, Ryu, Hee-Sug
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer US 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4757622/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26092018
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00464-015-4292-9
_version_ 1782416480425476096
author Paek, Jiheum
Lee, Jung-Dong
Kong, Tae Wook
Chang, Suk-Joon
Ryu, Hee-Sug
author_facet Paek, Jiheum
Lee, Jung-Dong
Kong, Tae Wook
Chang, Suk-Joon
Ryu, Hee-Sug
author_sort Paek, Jiheum
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to compare the surgical outcomes of robotic single-site (RSS-H) and laparoendoscopic single-site total hysterectomy (LESS-H) and to evaluate the feasibility of RSS-H in patients with benign gynecologic disease. METHODS: The RSS-H was performed using the da Vinci single-site surgical platform, and the LESS-H using a single multi-channel port system at the umbilicus. Among 467 consecutive patients who had undergone total hysterectomy for benign gynecologic disease, surgical outcomes were compared between RSS-H group (n = 25) and LESS-H group (n = 442) after propensity score matching. RESULTS: All operations were completed robotically and laparoscopically without conversion to laparotomy, respectively. The RSS-H group had longer operating times and less operative bleeding compared to the LESS-H group. While the LESS-H showed 1.4 % of major complication rate, the RSS-H had no perioperative complication. Even after propensity score matching, the RSS-H still showed longer operating times (170.9 vs 94.1 min, p < 0.0001) and less operative bleeding (median estimated blood loss, 20 vs 50 ml, p = 0.009; mean hemoglobin drop, 1.6 vs 2.0 g/dl, p = 0.038) than the LESS-H. CONCLUSIONS: The RSS-H could be a feasible and safe procedure in appropriately selected patients with benign gynecologic disease, and further experience and technical refinements will continue to improve operative results. Prospective randomized trials will permit the evaluation of the potential benefits of the RSS surgery as a minimally invasive surgical approach.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4757622
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher Springer US
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-47576222016-02-26 Robotic single-site versus laparoendoscopic single-site hysterectomy: a propensity score matching study Paek, Jiheum Lee, Jung-Dong Kong, Tae Wook Chang, Suk-Joon Ryu, Hee-Sug Surg Endosc Article BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to compare the surgical outcomes of robotic single-site (RSS-H) and laparoendoscopic single-site total hysterectomy (LESS-H) and to evaluate the feasibility of RSS-H in patients with benign gynecologic disease. METHODS: The RSS-H was performed using the da Vinci single-site surgical platform, and the LESS-H using a single multi-channel port system at the umbilicus. Among 467 consecutive patients who had undergone total hysterectomy for benign gynecologic disease, surgical outcomes were compared between RSS-H group (n = 25) and LESS-H group (n = 442) after propensity score matching. RESULTS: All operations were completed robotically and laparoscopically without conversion to laparotomy, respectively. The RSS-H group had longer operating times and less operative bleeding compared to the LESS-H group. While the LESS-H showed 1.4 % of major complication rate, the RSS-H had no perioperative complication. Even after propensity score matching, the RSS-H still showed longer operating times (170.9 vs 94.1 min, p < 0.0001) and less operative bleeding (median estimated blood loss, 20 vs 50 ml, p = 0.009; mean hemoglobin drop, 1.6 vs 2.0 g/dl, p = 0.038) than the LESS-H. CONCLUSIONS: The RSS-H could be a feasible and safe procedure in appropriately selected patients with benign gynecologic disease, and further experience and technical refinements will continue to improve operative results. Prospective randomized trials will permit the evaluation of the potential benefits of the RSS surgery as a minimally invasive surgical approach. Springer US 2015-06-20 2016 /pmc/articles/PMC4757622/ /pubmed/26092018 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00464-015-4292-9 Text en © The Author(s) 2015 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.
spellingShingle Article
Paek, Jiheum
Lee, Jung-Dong
Kong, Tae Wook
Chang, Suk-Joon
Ryu, Hee-Sug
Robotic single-site versus laparoendoscopic single-site hysterectomy: a propensity score matching study
title Robotic single-site versus laparoendoscopic single-site hysterectomy: a propensity score matching study
title_full Robotic single-site versus laparoendoscopic single-site hysterectomy: a propensity score matching study
title_fullStr Robotic single-site versus laparoendoscopic single-site hysterectomy: a propensity score matching study
title_full_unstemmed Robotic single-site versus laparoendoscopic single-site hysterectomy: a propensity score matching study
title_short Robotic single-site versus laparoendoscopic single-site hysterectomy: a propensity score matching study
title_sort robotic single-site versus laparoendoscopic single-site hysterectomy: a propensity score matching study
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4757622/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26092018
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00464-015-4292-9
work_keys_str_mv AT paekjiheum roboticsinglesiteversuslaparoendoscopicsinglesitehysterectomyapropensityscorematchingstudy
AT leejungdong roboticsinglesiteversuslaparoendoscopicsinglesitehysterectomyapropensityscorematchingstudy
AT kongtaewook roboticsinglesiteversuslaparoendoscopicsinglesitehysterectomyapropensityscorematchingstudy
AT changsukjoon roboticsinglesiteversuslaparoendoscopicsinglesitehysterectomyapropensityscorematchingstudy
AT ryuheesug roboticsinglesiteversuslaparoendoscopicsinglesitehysterectomyapropensityscorematchingstudy