Author:
Lenfant Louis,Canlorbe Geoffroy,Belghiti Jérémie,Kreaden Usha Seshadri,Hebert April E.,Nikpayam Marianne,Uzan Catherine,Azaïs Henri
Abstract
AbstractThe potential benefits and limitations of benign hysterectomy surgical approaches are still debated. We aimed at evaluating any differences with a systematic review and meta-analysis. PubMed, MEDLINE, and EMBASE databases were last searched on 6/2/2021 to identify English randomized controlled trials (RCTs), prospective cohort and retrospective independent database studies published between Jan 1, 2010 and Dec 31, 2020 reporting perioperative outcomes following robotic hysterectomy versus laparoscopic, open, or vaginal approach (PROSPERO #CRD42022352718). Twenty-four articles were included that reported on 110,306 robotic, 262,715 laparoscopic, 189,237 vaginal, and 554,407 open patients. The robotic approach was associated with a shorter hospital stay (p < 0.00001), less blood loss (p = 0.009), and fewer complications (OR: 0.42 [0.27, 0.66], p = 0.0001) when compared to the open approach. The main benefit compared to the laparoscopic and vaginal approaches was a shorter hospital (R/L WMD: – 0.144 [– 0.21, – 0.08], p < 0.0001; R/V WMD: – 0.39 [– 0.70, – 0.08], p = 0.01). Other benefits seen were sensitive to the inclusion of database studies. Study type differences in outcomes, a lack of RCTs for robotic vs. open comparisons, learning curve issues, and limited robotic vs. vaginal publications are limitations. While the robotic approach was mainly comparable to the laparoscopic approach, this meta-analysis confirms the classic benefits of minimally invasive surgery when comparing robotic hysterectomy to open surgery. We also reported the advantages of robotic surgery over vaginal surgery in a patient population with a higher incidence of large uterus and prior surgery.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Health Informatics,Surgery
Reference46 articles.
1. Wright JD, Huang Y, Li AH, Melamed A, Hershman DL (2022) Nationwide estimates of annual inpatient and outpatient hysterectomies performed in the United States. Obstet Gynecol 139:446–448
2. https://www.has-santefr/upload/docs/application/pdf/2021-12/rapport_hysterectomie_robot-assistee.pdf. Accessed 14 Jun 2023
3. Cohen SL, Ajao MO, Clark NV, Vitonis AF, Einarsson JI (2017) Outpatient hysterectomy volume in the United States. Obstet Gynecol 130:130–137
4. Chevrot A, Margueritte F, Fritel X, Serfaty A, Huchon C, Fauconnier A (2021) Hysterectomy: practices evolution between 2009 and 2019 in France. Gynecol Obstet Fertil Senol 49:816–822
5. Gala RB, Margulies R, Steinberg A, Murphy M, Lukban J, Jeppson P, Aschkenazi S, Olivera C, South M, Lowenstein L, Schaffer J, Balk EM, Sung V, Society of Gynecologic Surgeons Systematic Review G (2014) Systematic review of robotic surgery in gynecology: robotic techniques compared with laparoscopy and laparotomy. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 21:353–361
Cited by
1 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献