Robotic-assisted surgery for gynecological indications in children and adolescents: European multicenter report.
Adolescents
Children
Gynecology
Robot
Robotic-assisted
Tumors
Journal
Journal of robotic surgery
ISSN: 1863-2491
Titre abrégé: J Robot Surg
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101300401
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
13 Jan 2024
13 Jan 2024
Historique:
received:
24
08
2023
accepted:
07
12
2023
medline:
13
1
2024
pubmed:
13
1
2024
entrez:
13
1
2024
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Robotic-assisted surgery (RAS) is increasingly adopted in the pediatric population. This retrospective multicenter study aimed to report application of RAS for gynecological indications in pediatric patients. The medical records of all girls with gynecological pathology, operated in 4 different institutions over a 3-year period, were retrospectively collected. Robot docking time, total operative time, length of stay (LOS), requirement time of pain medication, complication rate, conversion rate, and pathology were analyzed. Twenty-three girls, with median age of 12.3 years (range 0.6-17.8) and median weight of 47.2 kg (range 9-73), received the following RAS procedures: ovarian cystectomy for ovarian cyst/mass (n = 10), salpingo-oophorectomy for ovarian complex mass (n = 6), bilateral gonadectomy for Turner syndrome SRY + (n = 1), salpingectomy for fallopian tube lesion (n = 1), paratubal cyst excision (n = 1), Gartner cyst excision (n = 1), paravaginal ganglioneuroma resection (n = 1), fistula closure in urogenital sinus (n = 1), and vaginoplasty using ileal flap in cloaca malformation (n = 1). Median operative time was 144.9 min (range 64-360), and median docking time was 17.3 min (range 7-50). Conversion to open or laparoscopy was not necessary in any case. Median LOS was 2.1 days (range 1-7), and median analgesic requirement was 2.2 days (range 1-6). One patient (4.3%) needed redo-surgery for recurrent Gartner cyst (Clavien 3b). This preliminary experience showed that RAS is safe and feasible for surgical treatment of gynecological pathology in pediatric patients, although no conclusive data are available to confirm its superiority over traditional laparoscopy. Randomized, prospective, comparative studies are needed to identify the gold standard approach for such indication.
Identifiants
pubmed: 38217834
doi: 10.1007/s11701-023-01767-9
pii: 10.1007/s11701-023-01767-9
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
20Informations de copyright
© 2024. The Author(s).
Références
Lanfranco AR, Castellanos AE, Desai JP, Meyers WC (2004) Robotic surgery: a current perspective. Ann Surg 239:14–21
doi: 10.1097/01.sla.0000103020.19595.7d
pubmed: 14685095
pmcid: 1356187
Mucksavage P, Kerbl DC, Lee JY (2011) The da Vinci(R) Surgical System overcomes innate hand dominance. J Endourol 25:1385–1388
doi: 10.1089/end.2011.0093
pubmed: 21815795
Spinoit AF, Nguyen H, Subramaniam R (2017) Role of robotics in children: a brave New World! Eur Urol Focus 3(2–3):172–180
doi: 10.1016/j.euf.2017.08.011
pubmed: 28889938
Andolfi C, Kumar R, Boysen WR, Gundeti MS (2019) Current status of robotic surgery in pediatric urology. J Laparoend Adv Surg Tech Part A 29(2):159–166
doi: 10.1089/lap.2018.0745
Denning NL, Kallis MP, Prince JM (2020) Pediatric robotic surgery. Surg Clin North Am 100(2):431–443
doi: 10.1016/j.suc.2019.12.004
pubmed: 32169188
Fuchs ME, DaJusta DG (2020) Robotics in pediatric urology. Int Braz J Urol 46(3):322–327
doi: 10.1590/s1677-5538.ibju.2020.99.03
pubmed: 31961623
pmcid: 7088494
Fernandez N, Farhat WA (2019) A comprehensive analysis of robot-assisted surgery uptake in the pediatric surgical discipline. Front Surg 6:9
doi: 10.3389/fsurg.2019.00009
pubmed: 30915338
pmcid: 6422870
Mei H, Tang S (2023) Robotic-assisted surgery in the pediatric surgeons’ world: current situation and future prospectives. Front Pediatr 11:1120831
doi: 10.3389/fped.2023.1120831
pubmed: 36865692
pmcid: 9971628
Varda BK, Wang Y, Chung BI, Lee RS, Kurtz MP, Nelson CP, Chang SL (2018) Has the robot caught up? National trends in utilization, perioperative outcomes, and cost for open, laparoscopic, and robotic pediatric pyeloplasty in the United States from 2003 to 2015. J Pediatr Urol 14(4):336.e1-336.e8
doi: 10.1016/j.jpurol.2017.12.010
pubmed: 29530407
Light A, Karthikeyan S, Maruthan S, Elhage O, Danuser H, Dasgupta P (2018) Peri-operative outcomes and complications after laparoscopic vs robot-assisted dismembered pyeloplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BJU Int 122(2):181–194
doi: 10.1111/bju.14170
pubmed: 29453902
Lee NG, Corbett ST, Cobb K, Bailey GC, Burns AS, Peters CA (2015) Bi-institutional comparison of robot-assisted laparoscopic versus open ureteroureterostomy in the pediatric population. J Endourol 29(11):1237–1241
doi: 10.1089/end.2015.0223
pubmed: 26159231
Koga H, Murakami H, Ochi T, Miyano G, Lane GJ, Yamataka A (2019) Comparison of robotic versus laparoscopic hepaticojejunostomy for choledochal cyst in children: a first report. Pediatr Surg Int 35(12):1421–1425
doi: 10.1007/s00383-019-04565-3
pubmed: 31555861
Nakib G, Calcaterra V, Scorletti F, Romano P, Goruppi I, Mencherini S, Avolio L, Pelizzo G (2013) Robotic assisted surgery in pediatric gynecology: promising innovation in mini invasive surgical procedures. J Pediatr Adolesc Gynecol 26(1):e5–e7
doi: 10.1016/j.jpag.2012.09.009
pubmed: 23158752
Xie XX, Wang N, Wang ZH, Zhu YY, Wang JR, Wang XQ (2019) Robotic-assisted resection of ovarian tumors in children: A case report and review of literature. World J Clin Cases 7(17):2542–2548
doi: 10.12998/wjcc.v7.i17.2542
pubmed: 31559290
pmcid: 6745331
Xu D, Gao H, Yu S, Huang G, Lu D, Yang K, Zhang W, Zhang W (2022) Ensuring safety and feasibility for resection of pediatric benign ovarian tumors by single-port robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery using the da Vinci Xi system. Front Surg 9:944662
doi: 10.3389/fsurg.2022.944662
pubmed: 36061048
pmcid: 9437548
Peters CA (2004) Laparoscopic and robotic approach to genitourinary anomalies in children. Urol Clin North Am 31:595
doi: 10.1016/j.ucl.2004.04.022
pubmed: 15313068
Chang C, Steinberg Z, Shah A, Gundeti MS (2014) Patient positioning and port placement for robot-assisted surgery. J Endourol 28:631–638
doi: 10.1089/end.2013.0733
pubmed: 24548088
pmcid: 4382714
Esposito C, Settimi A, Del Conte F, Cerulo M, Coppola V, Farina A, Crocetto F, Ricciardi E, Esposito G, Escolino M (2020) Image-guided pediatric surgery using Indocyanine Green (ICG) fluorescence in laparoscopic and robotic surgery. Front Pediatr 8:314
doi: 10.3389/fped.2020.00314
pubmed: 32626676
pmcid: 7311575
Ciro E, Vincenzo C, Mariapina C, Fulvia DC, Vincenzo B, Giorgia E, Roberto C, Lepore B, Castagnetti M, Califano G, Escolino M (2022) Review of a 25-Year experience in the management of ovarian masses in neonates, children and adolescents: from laparoscopy to robotics and indocyanine green fluorescence technology. Children (Basel) 9(8):1219
pubmed: 36010109
Abdelhafeez A, Talbot L, Murphy AJ, Davidoff AM (2021) Indocyanine green-guided pediatric tumor resection: approach, utility, and challenges. Front Pediatr 9:689612
doi: 10.3389/fped.2021.689612
pubmed: 34616696
pmcid: 8489593