Cargando…

Review of Robotic Surgery in Gynecology—The Future Is Here

The authors present a systematic review of randomized and observational, retrospective and prospective studies to compare between robotic surgery as opposed to laparoscopic, abdominal, and vaginal surgery for the treatment of both benign and malignant gynecologic indications. The comparison focuses...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Lauterbach, Roy, Matanes, Emad, Lowenstein, Lior
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Rambam Health Care Campus 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5415365/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28467761
http://dx.doi.org/10.5041/RMMJ.10296
_version_ 1783233510350258176
author Lauterbach, Roy
Matanes, Emad
Lowenstein, Lior
author_facet Lauterbach, Roy
Matanes, Emad
Lowenstein, Lior
author_sort Lauterbach, Roy
collection PubMed
description The authors present a systematic review of randomized and observational, retrospective and prospective studies to compare between robotic surgery as opposed to laparoscopic, abdominal, and vaginal surgery for the treatment of both benign and malignant gynecologic indications. The comparison focuses on operative times, surgical outcomes, and surgical complications associated with the various surgical techniques. PubMed was the main search engine utilized in search of study data. The review included studies of various designs that included at least 25 women who had undergone robotic gynecologic surgery. Fifty-five studies (42 comparative and 13 non-comparative) met eligibility criteria. After careful analysis, we found that robotic surgery was consistently connected to shorter post-surgical hospitalization when compared to open surgery, a difference less significant when compared to laparoscopic surgery. Also, it seems that robotic surgery is highly feasible in gynecology. There are quite a few inconsistencies regarding operative times and estimated blood loss between the different approaches, though in the majority of studies estimated blood loss was lower in the robotic surgery group. The high variance in operative times resulted from the difference in surgeon’s experience. The decision whether robotic surgery should become mainstream in gynecological surgery or remain another surgical technique in the gynecological surgeon’s toolbox requires quite a few more randomized controlled clinical trials. In any case, in order to bring robotic surgery down to the front row of surgery, training surgeons is by far the most important goal for the next few years.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5415365
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher Rambam Health Care Campus
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-54153652017-05-10 Review of Robotic Surgery in Gynecology—The Future Is Here Lauterbach, Roy Matanes, Emad Lowenstein, Lior Rambam Maimonides Med J Special Issue on Gynecology, Fertility, and Obstetrics The authors present a systematic review of randomized and observational, retrospective and prospective studies to compare between robotic surgery as opposed to laparoscopic, abdominal, and vaginal surgery for the treatment of both benign and malignant gynecologic indications. The comparison focuses on operative times, surgical outcomes, and surgical complications associated with the various surgical techniques. PubMed was the main search engine utilized in search of study data. The review included studies of various designs that included at least 25 women who had undergone robotic gynecologic surgery. Fifty-five studies (42 comparative and 13 non-comparative) met eligibility criteria. After careful analysis, we found that robotic surgery was consistently connected to shorter post-surgical hospitalization when compared to open surgery, a difference less significant when compared to laparoscopic surgery. Also, it seems that robotic surgery is highly feasible in gynecology. There are quite a few inconsistencies regarding operative times and estimated blood loss between the different approaches, though in the majority of studies estimated blood loss was lower in the robotic surgery group. The high variance in operative times resulted from the difference in surgeon’s experience. The decision whether robotic surgery should become mainstream in gynecological surgery or remain another surgical technique in the gynecological surgeon’s toolbox requires quite a few more randomized controlled clinical trials. In any case, in order to bring robotic surgery down to the front row of surgery, training surgeons is by far the most important goal for the next few years. Rambam Health Care Campus 2017-04-28 /pmc/articles/PMC5415365/ /pubmed/28467761 http://dx.doi.org/10.5041/RMMJ.10296 Text en © 2017 Lauterbach et al. This is an open-access article. All its content, except where otherwise noted, is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Special Issue on Gynecology, Fertility, and Obstetrics
Lauterbach, Roy
Matanes, Emad
Lowenstein, Lior
Review of Robotic Surgery in Gynecology—The Future Is Here
title Review of Robotic Surgery in Gynecology—The Future Is Here
title_full Review of Robotic Surgery in Gynecology—The Future Is Here
title_fullStr Review of Robotic Surgery in Gynecology—The Future Is Here
title_full_unstemmed Review of Robotic Surgery in Gynecology—The Future Is Here
title_short Review of Robotic Surgery in Gynecology—The Future Is Here
title_sort review of robotic surgery in gynecology—the future is here
topic Special Issue on Gynecology, Fertility, and Obstetrics
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5415365/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28467761
http://dx.doi.org/10.5041/RMMJ.10296
work_keys_str_mv AT lauterbachroy reviewofroboticsurgeryingynecologythefutureishere
AT matanesemad reviewofroboticsurgeryingynecologythefutureishere
AT lowensteinlior reviewofroboticsurgeryingynecologythefutureishere