Robot-assisted pelvic floor reconstructive surgery: an international Delphi study of expert users.
Delphi consensus
Pelvic floor reconstructive surgery
Pelvic organ prolapse
Rectal prolapse
Robotic surgery
Journal
Surgical endoscopy
ISSN: 1432-2218
Titre abrégé: Surg Endosc
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 8806653
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
07 2023
07 2023
Historique:
received:
14
12
2022
accepted:
25
02
2023
medline:
7
7
2023
pubmed:
24
3
2023
entrez:
23
3
2023
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Robotic surgery has gained popularity for the reconstruction of pelvic floor defects. Nonetheless, there is no evidence that robot-assisted reconstructive surgery is either appropriate or superior to standard laparoscopy for the performance of pelvic floor reconstructive procedures or that it is sustainable. The aim of this project was to address the proper role of robotic pelvic floor reconstructive procedures using expert opinion. We set up an international, multidisciplinary group of 26 experts to participate in a Delphi process on robotics as applied to pelvic floor reconstructive surgery. The group comprised urogynecologists, urologists, and colorectal surgeons with long-term experience in the performance of pelvic floor reconstructive procedures and with the use of the robot, who were identified primarily based on peer-reviewed publications. Two rounds of the Delphi process were conducted. The first included 63 statements pertaining to surgeons' characteristics, general questions, indications, surgical technique, and future-oriented questions. A second round including 20 statements was used to reassess those statements where borderline agreement was obtained during the first round. The final step consisted of a face-to-face meeting with all participants to present and discuss the results of the analysis. The 26 experts agreed that robotics is a suitable indication for pelvic floor reconstructive surgery because of the significant technical advantages that it confers relative to standard laparoscopy. Experts considered these advantages particularly important for the execution of complex reconstructive procedures, although the benefits can be found also during less challenging cases. The experts considered the robot safe and effective for pelvic floor reconstruction and generally thought that the additional costs are offset by the increased surgical efficacy. Robotics is a suitable choice for pelvic reconstruction, but this Delphi initiative calls for more research to objectively assess the specific settings where robotic surgery would provide the most benefit.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Robotic surgery has gained popularity for the reconstruction of pelvic floor defects. Nonetheless, there is no evidence that robot-assisted reconstructive surgery is either appropriate or superior to standard laparoscopy for the performance of pelvic floor reconstructive procedures or that it is sustainable. The aim of this project was to address the proper role of robotic pelvic floor reconstructive procedures using expert opinion.
METHODS
We set up an international, multidisciplinary group of 26 experts to participate in a Delphi process on robotics as applied to pelvic floor reconstructive surgery. The group comprised urogynecologists, urologists, and colorectal surgeons with long-term experience in the performance of pelvic floor reconstructive procedures and with the use of the robot, who were identified primarily based on peer-reviewed publications. Two rounds of the Delphi process were conducted. The first included 63 statements pertaining to surgeons' characteristics, general questions, indications, surgical technique, and future-oriented questions. A second round including 20 statements was used to reassess those statements where borderline agreement was obtained during the first round. The final step consisted of a face-to-face meeting with all participants to present and discuss the results of the analysis.
RESULTS
The 26 experts agreed that robotics is a suitable indication for pelvic floor reconstructive surgery because of the significant technical advantages that it confers relative to standard laparoscopy. Experts considered these advantages particularly important for the execution of complex reconstructive procedures, although the benefits can be found also during less challenging cases. The experts considered the robot safe and effective for pelvic floor reconstruction and generally thought that the additional costs are offset by the increased surgical efficacy.
CONCLUSION
Robotics is a suitable choice for pelvic reconstruction, but this Delphi initiative calls for more research to objectively assess the specific settings where robotic surgery would provide the most benefit.
Identifiants
pubmed: 36952046
doi: 10.1007/s00464-023-10001-4
pii: 10.1007/s00464-023-10001-4
pmc: PMC10035464
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
5215-5225Informations de copyright
© 2023. The Author(s).
Références
Pushkar DY, Kasyan GR, Popov AA (2021) Robotic sacrocolpopexy in pelvic organ prolapse: a review of current literature. Curr Opin Urol 31:531–536. https://doi.org/10.1097/MOU.0000000000000932
doi: 10.1097/MOU.0000000000000932
pubmed: 34506336
Pan K, Zhang Y, Wang Y, Wang Y, Xu H (2016) A systematic review and meta-analysis of conventional laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy versus robot-assisted laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy. Int J Gynecol Obstet 132:284–291. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijgo.2015.08.008
doi: 10.1016/j.ijgo.2015.08.008
Schachar JS, Matthews CA (2020) Robotic-assisted repair of pelvic organ prolapse: a scoping review of the literature. Transl Androl Urol 9:959–970. https://doi.org/10.21037/tau.2019.10.02
doi: 10.21037/tau.2019.10.02
pubmed: 32420212
pmcid: 7215036
Flynn J, Larach JT, Kong JCH, Warrier SK, Heriot A (2021) Robotic versus laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Colorectal Dis 36:1621–1631. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00384-021-03904-y
doi: 10.1007/s00384-021-03904-y
pubmed: 33718972
Albayati S, Chen P, Morgan MJ, Toh JWT (2019) Robotic vs. laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy for external rectal prolapse and rectal intussusception: a systematic review. Tech Coloproctol 23:529–535. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10151-019-02014-w
doi: 10.1007/s10151-019-02014-w
pubmed: 31254202
Naldini G, Fabiani B, Sturiale A, Russo E, Simoncini T (2021) Advantages of robotic surgery in the treatment of complex pelvic organs prolapse. Updates Surg 73:1115–1124. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13304-020-00913-4
doi: 10.1007/s13304-020-00913-4
pubmed: 33387168
Capmas P, Suarthana E, Larouche M (2021) Conversion rate of laparoscopic or robotic to open sacrocolpopexy: are there associated factors and complications? Int Urogynecol J 32:2249–2256. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-020-04570-4
doi: 10.1007/s00192-020-04570-4
pubmed: 33104825
Callewaert G, Bosteels J, Housmans S, Verguts J, van Cleynenbreugel B, van der Aa F, de Ridder D, Vergote I, Deprest J (2016) Laparoscopic versus robotic-assisted sacrocolpopexy for pelvic organ prolapse: a systematic review. Gynecol Surg 13:115–123. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10397-016-0930-z
doi: 10.1007/s10397-016-0930-z
pubmed: 27226787
pmcid: 4854942
Mäkelä-Kaikkonen J, Rautio T, Klintrup K, Takala H, Vierimaa M, Ohtonen P, Mäkelä J (2014) Robotic-assisted and laparoscopic ventral rectopexy in the treatment of rectal prolapse: a matched-pairs study of operative details and complications. Tech Coloproctol 18:151–155. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10151-013-1042-7
doi: 10.1007/s10151-013-1042-7
pubmed: 23839795
Giannini A, Caretto M, Russo E, Mannella P, Simoncini T (2019) Advances in surgical strategies for prolapse. Climacteric. https://doi.org/10.1080/13697137.2018.1543266
doi: 10.1080/13697137.2018.1543266
pubmed: 31674202
Giannini A, Russo E, Cano A, Chedraui P, Goulis DG, Lambrinoudaki I, Lopes P, Mishra G, Mueck A, Rees M, Senturk LM, Stevenson JC, Stute P, Tuomikoski P, Simoncini T (2018) Current management of pelvic organ prolapse in aging women: EMAS clinical guide. Maturitas. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.maturitas.2018.02.004
doi: 10.1016/j.maturitas.2018.02.004
pubmed: 29477712
Mäkelä-Kaikkonen J, Rautio T, Ohinmaa A, Koivurova S, Ohtonen P, Sintonen H, Mäkelä J (2019) Cost-analysis and quality of life after laparoscopic and robotic ventral mesh rectopexy for posterior compartment prolapse: a randomized trial. Tech Coloproctol 23:461–470. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10151-019-01991-2
doi: 10.1007/s10151-019-01991-2
pubmed: 31069557
pmcid: 6620369
Wang R, Hacker MR, Richardson M (2021) Cost-effectiveness of surgical treatment pathways for prolapse. Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg 27:E408–E413. https://doi.org/10.1097/SPV.0000000000000948
doi: 10.1097/SPV.0000000000000948
pubmed: 32941315
pmcid: 8579510
Humphrey-Murto S, Varpio L, Wood TJ, Gonsalves C, Ufholz LA, Mascioli K, Wang C, Foth T (2017) The use of the Delphi and other consensus group methods in medical education research: a review. Acad Med 92:1491–1498. https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0000000000001812
doi: 10.1097/ACM.0000000000001812
pubmed: 28678098
Boulkedid R, Abdoul H, Loustau M, Sibony O, Alberti C (2011) Using and reporting the Delphi method for selecting healthcare quality indicators: a systematic review. PLoS ONE. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0020476
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0020476
pubmed: 21694759
pmcid: 3111406
Lyons SD, Law KSK (2013) Laparoscopic vessel sealing technologies. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 20:301–307. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmig.2013.02.012
doi: 10.1016/j.jmig.2013.02.012
pubmed: 23659750
Chu CM, Agrawal A, Mazloomdoost D, Barenberg B, Dune TJ, Pilkinton ML, Chan RC, Weber Lebrun EE, Arya LA (2019) Patients’ knowledge of and attitude toward robotic surgery for pelvic organ prolapse. Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg 25:279–283. https://doi.org/10.1097/SPV.0000000000000556
doi: 10.1097/SPV.0000000000000556
pubmed: 29369840
Thomas D, Medoff B, Anger J, Chughtai B (2020) Direct-to-consumer advertising for robotic surgery. J Robot Surg 14:17–20. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11701-019-00989-0
doi: 10.1007/s11701-019-00989-0
pubmed: 31243703
Müller PC, Kapp JR, Vetter D, Bonavina L, Brown W, Castro S, Cheong E, Darling GE, Egberts J, Ferri L, Gisbertz SS, Gockel I, Grimminger PP, Hofstetter WL, Hölscher AH, Low DE, Luyer M, Markar SR, Mönig SP, Moorthy K, Morse CR, Müller-Stich BP, Nafteux P, Nieponice A, Nieuwenhuijzen GAP, Nilsson M, Palanivelu C, Pattyn P, Pera M, Räsänen J, Ribeiro U, Rosman C, Schröder W, Sgromo B, van Berge Henegouwen MI, van Hillegersberg R, van Veer H, van Workum F, Watson DI, Wijnhoven BPL, Gutschow CA (2021) Fit-for-discharge criteria after esophagectomy: an international expert Delphi consensus. Dis Esophagus. https://doi.org/10.1093/dote/doaa101
doi: 10.1093/dote/doaa101
pubmed: 32960264
Fuchs HF, Collins JW, Babic B, DuCoin C, Meireles OR, Grimminger PP, Read M, Abbas A, Sallum R, Müller-Stich BP, Perez D, Biebl M, Egberts J-H, van Hillegersberg R, Bruns CJ (2021) Robotic-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) for esophageal cancer training curriculum-a worldwide Delphi consensus study. Dis Esophagus 35:doab055
doi: 10.1093/dote/doab055
Dell’Oglio P, Turri F, Larcher A, D’Hondt F, Sanchez-Salas R, Bochner B, Palou J, Weston R, Hosseini A, Canda AE, Bjerggaard J, Cacciamani G, Olsen KØ, Gill I, Piechaud T, Artibani W, van Leeuwen PJ, Stenzl A, Kelly J, Dasgupta P, Wijburg C, Collins JW, Desai M, van der Poel HG, Montorsi F, Wiklund P, Mottrie A (2022) Definition of a structured training curriculum for robot-assisted radical cystectomy with intracorporeal ileal conduit in male patients: a Delphi consensus study led by the erus educational board. Eur Urol Focus 8:160–164. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euf.2020.12.015
doi: 10.1016/j.euf.2020.12.015
pubmed: 33402314
Collins JW, Marcus HJ, Ghazi A, Sridhar A, Hashimoto D, Hager G, Arezzo A, Jannin P, Maier-Hein L, Marz K, Valdastri P, Mori K, Elson D, Giannarou S, Slack M, Hares L, Beaulieu Y, Levy J, Laplante G, Ramadorai A, Jarc A, Andrews B, Garcia P, Neemuchwala H, Andrusaite A, Kimpe T, Hawkes D, Kelly JD, Stoyanov D (2021) Ethical implications of AI in robotic surgical training: a Delphi consensus statement. Eur Urol Focus. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euf.2021.04.006
doi: 10.1016/j.euf.2021.04.006
pubmed: 33941503
pmcid: 9435953
van der Schans EM, Verheijen PM, el Moumni M, Broeders IAMJ, Consten ECJ (2022) Evaluation of the learning curve of robot-assisted laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy. Surg Endosc 36:2096–2104. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-021-08496-w
doi: 10.1007/s00464-021-08496-w
pubmed: 33835255
Carter-Brooks CM, Du AL, Bonidie MJ, Shepherd JP (2018) The impact of a dedicated robotic team on robotic-assisted sacrocolpopexy outcomes. Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg 24:13–16. https://doi.org/10.1097/SPV.0000000000000413
doi: 10.1097/SPV.0000000000000413
pubmed: 28430728
van Zanten F, Schraffordt Koops SE, Pasker-De Jong PCM, Lenters E, Schreuder HWR (2019) Learning curve of robot-assisted laparoscopic sacrocolpo(recto)pexy: a cumulative sum analysis. Am J Obstet Gynecol 221:483.e1-483.e11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2019.05.037
doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2019.05.037
pubmed: 31152711
Evans S, McCarter M, Abimbola O, Myers EM (2021) Enhanced recovery and same-day discharge after minimally invasive sacrocolpopexy. Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg 27:740–745. https://doi.org/10.1097/SPV.0000000000001043
doi: 10.1097/SPV.0000000000001043
pubmed: 34261105
Kisby CK, Polin MR, Visco AG, Siddiqui NY (2019) Same-day discharge after robotic-assisted sacrocolpopexy. Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg 25:337–341. https://doi.org/10.1097/SPV.0000000000000573
doi: 10.1097/SPV.0000000000000573
pubmed: 29489556
Lloyd JC, Guzman-Negron J, Goldman HB (2018) Feasibility of same day discharge after robotic assisted pelvic floor reconstruction. Can J Urol 25:9307–9312
pubmed: 29900817
Faucheron JL, Trilling B, Barbois S, Sage PY, Waroquet PA, Reche F (2016) Day case robotic ventral rectopexy compared with day case laparoscopic ventral rectopexy: a prospective study. Tech Coloproctol 20:695–700. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10151-016-1518-3
doi: 10.1007/s10151-016-1518-3
pubmed: 27530905
Trilling B, Sage PY, Reche F, Barbois S, Waroquet PA, Faucheron JL (2018) Early experience with ambulatory robotic ventral rectopexy. J Visc Surg 155:5–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jviscsurg.2017.05.005
doi: 10.1016/j.jviscsurg.2017.05.005
pubmed: 29396113