Implementation of robot-assisted myomectomy in a large university hospital: a retrospective descriptive study.
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:
Sep 2023
Sep 2023
Historique:
medline:
24
9
2023
pubmed:
24
9
2023
entrez:
24
9
2023
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Background: Myomectomy is often the preferred treatment for symptomatic patients with myomas who wish to preserve their fertility, with a shift from open surgery towards minimally invasive techniques. Retrospective study assessing patient and surgery characteristics, follow-up, and outcomes of robot-assisted myomectomy (RAM) and abdominal myomectomy (AM) in women treated between January 1, 2018, and February 28, 2022, in a Belgian tertiary care hospital. A descriptive analysis was conducted on consecutive patients who underwent myomectomies. 2018 was considered the learning curve for RAM. We assessed rate of open surgery, operation time, postoperative hospital stay, and operative complications. In total, 94 RAMs and 15 AMs were performed. The rate of AMs was 56.5% in 2018 versus 2.3% after the learning curve. The median operation time for RAM was 136.5 minutes and 131 minutes for AM. Conversion rate for RAM was 0%. The median postoperative hospital stay after RAM was 1 night and 4 nights for AM. Postoperative complication rate was low, with only 14.9% and 33.3% of patients requiring pharmacological treatment of complications after RAM or AM, respectively. No surgical re-intervention was needed in any group. Implementation of RAM at our centre resulted in a significant reduction of open surgery rate. RAM demonstrated shorter hospital stays and a lower incidence of complications compared to AM. Our study highlights the successful adoption of RAM, showcasing its potential to replace AM even in complex cases. The findings affirm the safety and feasibility of RAM, supporting its use as a valuable technique for minimally invasive myomectomy.
Sections du résumé
Background
UNASSIGNED
Background: Myomectomy is often the preferred treatment for symptomatic patients with myomas who wish to preserve their fertility, with a shift from open surgery towards minimally invasive techniques.
Objectives
UNASSIGNED
Retrospective study assessing patient and surgery characteristics, follow-up, and outcomes of robot-assisted myomectomy (RAM) and abdominal myomectomy (AM) in women treated between January 1, 2018, and February 28, 2022, in a Belgian tertiary care hospital.
Materials and Methods
UNASSIGNED
A descriptive analysis was conducted on consecutive patients who underwent myomectomies. 2018 was considered the learning curve for RAM.
Main outcome measures
UNASSIGNED
We assessed rate of open surgery, operation time, postoperative hospital stay, and operative complications.
Results
UNASSIGNED
In total, 94 RAMs and 15 AMs were performed. The rate of AMs was 56.5% in 2018 versus 2.3% after the learning curve. The median operation time for RAM was 136.5 minutes and 131 minutes for AM. Conversion rate for RAM was 0%. The median postoperative hospital stay after RAM was 1 night and 4 nights for AM. Postoperative complication rate was low, with only 14.9% and 33.3% of patients requiring pharmacological treatment of complications after RAM or AM, respectively. No surgical re-intervention was needed in any group.
Conclusions
UNASSIGNED
Implementation of RAM at our centre resulted in a significant reduction of open surgery rate. RAM demonstrated shorter hospital stays and a lower incidence of complications compared to AM.
What is new?
UNASSIGNED
Our study highlights the successful adoption of RAM, showcasing its potential to replace AM even in complex cases. The findings affirm the safety and feasibility of RAM, supporting its use as a valuable technique for minimally invasive myomectomy.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37742201
doi: 10.52054/FVVO.15.3.089
pmc: PMC10643016
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
243-250Références
Diagnostics (Basel). 2023 Mar 23;13(7):
pubmed: 37046441
J Womens Health (Larchmt). 2006 Sep;15(7):818-29
pubmed: 16999637
Obstet Gynecol. 2011 Feb;117(2 Pt 1):256-266
pubmed: 21252737
Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 2018 Jan;46:31-42
pubmed: 29157931
Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2016 Jul;294(1):5-17
pubmed: 26969650
J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2019 Jul - Aug;26(5):809-810
pubmed: 30315895
Obstet Gynecol. 2017 Dec;130(6):1251-1260
pubmed: 29112659
Obstet Gynecol. 2011 Feb;117(2 Pt 1):396-403
pubmed: 21252757
Ann Surg. 2009 Aug;250(2):187-96
pubmed: 19638912
N Engl J Med. 2015 Apr 23;372(17):1646-55
pubmed: 25901428
J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2021 Feb;28(2):179-203
pubmed: 32827721
J Obstet Gynaecol Can. 2015 Feb;37(2):157-178
pubmed: 25767949
Obstet Gynecol. 2019 May;133(5):869-878
pubmed: 30969201
Hum Reprod Update. 2016 Nov;22(6):665-686
pubmed: 27466209
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014;(12):CD008978
pubmed: 25502433
BJOG. 2016 Dec;123(13):2183-2187
pubmed: 27533508
Fertil Steril. 2019 Jun;111(6):1252-1258.e1
pubmed: 30982607
Maturitas. 2014 Sep;79(1):106-16
pubmed: 24975954
BJOG. 2017 Sep;124(10):1501-1512
pubmed: 28296146
Perm J. 2020;24:
pubmed: 31905335
Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2011 Apr;113(1):3-13
pubmed: 21345435
Robot Surg. 2017 Jan 23;4:7-18
pubmed: 30697559
J Robot Surg. 2015 Dec;9(4):269-75
pubmed: 26530837
Lancet Oncol. 2015 Nov;16(15):1454-1456
pubmed: 26545835
J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2018 Nov - Dec;25(7):1266-1273
pubmed: 29631012
Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2010 Sep;152(1):96-102
pubmed: 20598796