Changes in route of hysterectomy in Norway since introduction of robotic approach.

Hysterectomy robotic hysterectomy surgical approach hysterectomy

Journal

Facts, views & vision in ObGyn
ISSN: 2032-0418
Titre abrégé: Facts Views Vis Obgyn
Pays: Belgium
ID NLM: 101578773

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
31 Mar 2021
Historique:
entrez: 23 4 2021
pubmed: 24 4 2021
medline: 24 4 2021
Statut: epublish

Résumé

From 2008, several Norwegian Health Trusts have acquired surgical robotic systems, and robotic hysterectomy accounted for 15 % of all hysterectomies performed in Norway in 2018. Robotic assisted hysterectomy is costly, and there is no evidence that the clinical outcome of robotic assisted hysterectomy is superior compared to the outcomes following other minimal invasive hysterectomies such as vaginal and laparoscopic hysterectomies. The objectives of this study were to describe the implementation of robotic hysterectomy and changes in other hysterectomy approaches, such as open abdominal, laparoscopic and vaginal hysterectomy in hospitals with and without robotic systems for hysterectomy. Quantitative study based on hysterectomy data between 2010 to 2018 from the Norwegian Patient Registry. 9 out of 19 health trusts performed robotic assisted hysterectomy during the study period. The rate of abdominal hysterectomies declined during the study period, both in the health trusts with and without available surgical robotic systems. The rate of other minimally invasive hysterectomies also declined in some health trusts after the implementation of robotic assisted hysterectomy. Robotic hysterectomy has been implemented and is increasing in Norway without a thorough evaluation of the effect on patient safety and possible economic consequences. According to our findings, it appears that the implementation of robotic hysterectomy has not had a significant impact on the use of open abdominal hysterectomy. Although associated with increased costs and a lack of evidence of improved clinical outcomes for women, robotic hysterectomy has furthermore to some extent replaced other minimal invasive hysterectomies.

Identifiants

pubmed: 33889859
doi: 10.52054/FVVO.13.1.005
pmc: PMC8051195
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Pagination

35-40

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2021 Facts, Views & Vision.

Références

Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2016 Jun;293(6):1169-83
pubmed: 26861466
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2015 Nov;213(5):665.e1-7
pubmed: 26188114
Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2014 Jun;177:1-10
pubmed: 24703710
Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2018 Mar;222:113-118
pubmed: 29408741
J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2016 Jan;23(1):18-27
pubmed: 26272688
Chin J Cancer Res. 2016 Apr;28(2):187-96
pubmed: 27199516
J Robot Surg. 2017 Dec;11(4):433-439
pubmed: 28144809
JAMA. 2013 Feb 20;309(7):689-98
pubmed: 23423414
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015 Aug 12;(8):CD003677
pubmed: 26264829
Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2009 May;144(1):3-7
pubmed: 19324491
Tidsskr Nor Laegeforen. 2009 Aug 13;129(15):1460-3
pubmed: 19690595
Obstet Gynecol. 2018 Jun;131(6):981-990
pubmed: 29742669
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2019 Apr 15;4:CD011422
pubmed: 30985921

Auteurs

M L Johanson (ML)

Department of Clinical and Molecular Medicine, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, 7491 Trondheim, Norway.

M Lieng (M)

Division of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Oslo University Hospital, 0424 Oslo, Norway.
Institute of Clinical Medicine, University of Oslo, 0316 Oslo, Norway.

Classifications MeSH