Laparoscopy vs. Robotic Surgery for Endometriosis (LAROSE): a multicenter, randomized, controlled trial

Tailoring radicality in diaphragmatic surgery for deep endometriosis: A matter of choice

Diaphragmatic endometriosis (DpE) is a rare disease localization which represents an important clinical challenge. The main criticisms toward the proper DpE management consist of poor consensus on both surgical indications and the choice between different surgical techniques available to treat the disease. Furthermore, only weak recommendations are provided by current guidelines and surgical management is mostly based on surgeon's experience. As consequence, the lack of standardization about the surgical treatment led to the risk of under- or over-treatments in patients suffering from this form of endometriosis. The latest evidence-based data suggest to adopt a lesion-oriented surgical approach serving as a guide in daily surgical activities, in order to ensure a tailored radicality and reduce the rate of surgery-related complications. Diaphragmatic endometriosis surgery should be performed only by expert surgeons with an extensive oncogynecologic expertise since it represents a technically demanding procedure. A multidisciplinary approach is also mandatory in order to adequately select and treat these patients by minimizing the risk of additional morbidity.

Role of robot-assisted laparoscopy in deep infiltrating endometriosis with bowel involvement: a systematic review and application of the IDEAL framework

AIMS

This review aims to evaluate the feasibility of robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery (RALS) as an alternative to standard laparoscopic surgery (SLS) for the treatment of bowel deep-infiltrative endometriosis. Additionally, it aims to provide guidance for future study design, by gaining insight into the current state of research, in accordance with the IDEAL framework.

METHOD

A systematic review was conducted to identify relevant studies on RALS for bowel deep infiltrating endometriosis in Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library and PubMed databases up to August 2023 and reported in keeping with PRISMA guidelines. The study was registered with PROSPERO Registration: CRD42022308611 RESULTS: Eleven primary studies were identified, encompassing 364 RALS patients and 83 SLS patients, from which surgical details, operative and postoperative outcomes were extracted. In the RALS group, mean operating time was longer (235 ± 112 min) than in the standard laparoscopy group (171 ± 76 min) (p < 0.01). Patients in the RALS group experienced a shorter hospital stay (5.3 ± 3.5 days vs. 7.3 ± 4.1 days) (p < 0.01), and appeared to have fewer postoperative complications compared to standard laparoscopy. Research evidence for RALS in bowel DE is at an IDEAL Stage 2B of development.

CONCLUSION

RALS is a safe and feasible alternative to standard laparoscopy for bowel endometriosis treatment, with a shorter overall length of stay despite longer operating times. Further robust randomized trials recommended to delineate other potential advantages of RALS.

How does robotic surgery affect gynecology patient care?

The aim of this review is to map the current research on the needs of gynecological patients treated with robotic surgery. Systematic Rapid Review. Pubmed, Web of Science, Google Scholar. Search was limited from the years 2017-2021. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) statement was followed. Rapid review is a synthesis of information produced in a shorter time than systematic reviews, which allows clinical nurses to access evidence in the decision-making process. The methodological steps implemented were the following: (1) needs assessment and topic selection, (2) study development, (3) literature search, (4) screening and study selection, (5) data extraction, (6) risk-of-bias assessment and (7) knowledge synthesis. The search yielded 815 articles, 746 were excluded after screening the title and abstract, and 69 full-text syntheses were performed. Only 10 articles were included in the final analysis. This research evaluated the effects of robotic surgery on the patient under seven themes; operative time, length of stay, complications, estimated blood loss, pain, survivor, and conversion. Five studies were on endometrial cancer, one study on gynecologic cancer, two studies on hysterectomy, one study on patient safety, and one study on cervical cancer. The results show that robotic surgery can change the needs of patients by solving ongoing problems in gynecological patients. This requires a better understanding of robotic surgery procedures while facilitating nursing care over patient care.

Efficacy between Conventional Laparoscopy and Robotic Surgery in Mexican Patients with Endometriosis: A Comparative Study

Background. Surgical management of endometriosis is essential, and deep endometriosis involves the invasion of endometrial tissue into other organs such as the bladder, ureters, and rectum. In Latin American countries, significant expertise has been achieved in conventional laparoscopy (CL); however, there is less experience in robot-assisted laparoscopy (RAL) because of the high cost of this technique. For this reason, studies comparing CL and RAL for the treatment of deep endometriosis in patients are scarce, making this study the first to share the experience of Mexican patients. Aim. The efficacy of CL vs. RAL in the management of deep endometriosis in Mexican patients was compared. Materials and Methods. We performed a retrospective and comparative study. We considered all patients treated with minimally invasive surgery for deep endometriosis between 2015 and 2023. Results. A total of 93 patients were included; 56 patients were treated with CL, and 37 patients were treated with RAL. A significant difference (p < 0.05) was observed in the postoperative length of stay, which was longer in patients treated with CL compared with those treated with RAL. Additionally, postoperative pain was less frequent in patients treated with RAL than in those treated with CL (p < 0.05). We did not observe a significant difference in operative time, blood loss, or perioperative complications between the two surgical techniques (p < 0.05). Conclusions. CL and RAL are effective methods for managing endometriosis in Mexican patients; however, RAL is beneficial for the treatment of deep endometriosis because patients experience postoperative pain less frequently than CL patients and have a shorter postoperative length of stay.

Robotic-assisted Laparoscopy Excision of a Severe Form of Diaphragmatic Endometriosis: A Retrospective Study of 60 Patients

STUDY OBJECTIVE

To assess the feasibility, effectiveness, and safety of the robotic surgical approach in the treatment of severe diaphragmatic endometriosis (DE).

DESIGN

Retrospective single-center study using data prospectively recorded in the Franco-European Multidisciplinary Institute of Endometriosis database and the National Observatory for Endometriosis database.

SETTING

Tertiary referral center. Endometriosis care center.

PATIENTS

Sixty consecutive patients undergoing robotic excision of severe DE from January 2020 to July 2023.

INTERVENTIONS

Robotic excision of severe DE.

MEASUREMENT AND MAIN RESULTS

Categorical and continuous variables were evaluated and compared using descriptive statistics. A p value of <.05 was considered statistically significant. Full-thickness diaphragmatic resection was performed in 76.7% of patients (46 of 60) and partial diaphragmatic muscle resection in 10% of cases (6 of 60). Peritoneal stripping technique was performed in 60% of patients (36 of 60), divided as follows: as the only technique in the case of extensive superficial diaphragmatic involvement in 13.3% of cases (8 of 60), in addition to full-thickness or partial diaphragmatic resection in the case of concomitant multiple foci in 46.7% of patients (28 of 60). Median operative time was 79.6 minutes with no statistically significative difference related to the surgeon performing surgery (p >.05). Intraoperative and postoperative complications occurred in 1.7% (1 of 60) and 6.6% of cases (4 of 60), respectively. Diaphragmatic hernia (Clavien-Dindo 3b) was the most common postoperative complication and required surgical repair in all cases. Median hospital stay was 24 hours. The rate of patients with complete recovery from DE symptoms has gradually increased during follow-up, reaching 89% after 12 months from surgery.

CONCLUSION

In this case series, robotic treatment of severe DE in expert hands was feasible, effective, and safe.

Robotic assisted versus laparoscopic surgery for deep endometriosis: a meta-analysis of current evidence

Endometriosis is a benign inflammatory onco-mimetic disease affecting 10-15% of women in the world. When it is refractory to medical treatments, surgery may be required. Usually, laparoscopy is the preferred approach, but robotic surgery has gained popularity in the last 15 years. This study aims to evaluate the safety and efficacy of robotic-assisted laparoscopic surgery (RAS) versus conventional laparoscopic surgery (LPS) in the treatment of endometriosis. This study adheres to PRISMA guidelines and is registered with PROSPERO. Studies reporting perioperative data comparing RAS and LPS surgery in patients with endometriosis querying PubMed, Google Scholar and ClinicalTrials.gov were included in the analysis. The Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2 tool (QUADAS-2) was used for the quality assessment of the selected articles. Fourteen studies were identified, including 2709 patients with endometriosis stage I-IV for the meta-analysis. There were no significant differences between RAS and LPS in terms of intraoperative and postoperative complications, conversion rate and estimated blood loss. However, patients in the RAS group have a longer operative time (p < 0.0001) and longer hospital stay (p = 0.020) than those in the laparoscopic group. Robotic surgery is not inferior to laparoscopy in patients with endometriosis in terms of surgical outcomes; however, RAS requires longer operative times and longer hospital stay. The benefits of robotic surgery should be sought in the easiest potential integration of robotic platforms with new technologies. Prospective studies comparing laparoscopy to the new robotic systems are desirable for greater robustness of scientific evidence.

Robotic surgery for deep-infiltrating endometriosis: is it time to take a step forward?

Endometriosis is a chronic debilitating disease that affects nearly 10% of women of the reproductive age. Although the treatment modalities of endometriosis are numerous, surgical excision of the endometriotic implants and nodules remains the sole cytoreductive approach. Laparoscopic excision of endometriosis was proven to be beneficial in improving the postoperative pain and fertility. Moreover, it was also proved to be safe and efficient in treating the visceral localization of deep endometriosis, such as urinary and colorectal endometriosis. More recently, robotic-assisted surgery gained attention in the field of endometriosis surgery. Although the robotic technology provides a 3D vision of the surgical field and 7-degree of freedom motion, the safety, efficacy, and cost-effectiveness of this approach are yet to be determined. With this paper, we aim to review the available evidence regarding the role of robotic surgery in the management of endometriosis along with the current practices in the field.

A systematic review to determine use of the Endometriosis Health Profiles to measure quality of life outcomes in women with endometriosis

BACKGROUND

The Endometriosis Health Profiles (EHPs), the EHP-30 and EHP-5, are patient-reported outcome measures that were developed to measure the health-related quality of life (HRQoL) of women living with endometriosis. Prior to their development, a systematic review was undertaken which identified that the HRQoL of women living with endometriosis was poorly understood, with only three medical and one surgical study identified.

OBJECTIVE AND RATIONALE

The 20-year anniversary of the EHP-30 provided a timely opportunity to assess how the tools have been used and explore what the findings tell us about the impact of endometriosis and its associated treatments upon women's QoL. Applying robust systematic review methodology, following PRISMA guidelines, we sought to answer: How many studies have used the EHP and for what purpose?; What are the demographic characteristics and international context of the studies?; What is the methodological nature and quality of the studies?; Which interventions have been assessed and what are the reported EHP outcomes?; and Can the EHP outcomes of these interventions be analysed using a meta-analysis and, if so, what do the results show?

SEARCH METHODS

The electronic databases MEDLINE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, PubMed, and Google Scholar were searched from the year the EHP was first published, in 2001 to 26 February 2020 using the search terms 'EHP30', 'EHP5', 'EHP-30', 'EHP-5', 'endometriosis health profile 30', and 'endometriosis health profile 5'. We updated the searches on 9 April 2021. All included studies were quality assessed using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT).

OUTCOMES

The review included 139 papers. In clinical intervention studies, the EHPs were deployed most frequently to measure the outcomes of medical (n = 35) and surgical (n = 21) treatment. The EHPs were also used in 13 other intervention studies, 29 non-interventional studies, 32 psychometric/cross cultural validation studies; six diagnostic studies, and in three other studies to measure outcomes in related conditions. They were mainly deployed in studies undertaken in Europe and North America. Overall, regardless of the nature of the intervention, most women reported improvements in HRQoL after treatment. Surgical interventions generally resulted in significant improvements for the longest amount of time. There was also evidence that when participants stopped taking medication their EHP scores worsened, perhaps reinforcing the temporary impact of medical treatment. Younger patients reported more negative impact upon their HRQoL. Further evidence using classical test theory to support the EHPs' robust psychometric properties, including acceptability, dimensionality, reliability, validity (including cross-cultural), and responsiveness, was demonstrated, particularly for the EHP-30. Strikingly, using anchor-based methods, EHP-30 responsiveness studies demonstrate the largest mean changes in the 'control and powerlessness' domain post-intervention, followed by 'pain'. MMAT outcomes indicated the quality of the papers was good, with the exception of five studies. A meta-analysis was not undertaken owing to the heterogeneity of the interventions and papers included in this review.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS

Women with endometriosis face a lifetime of surgical and/or medical interventions to keep the condition under control. Less invasive treatments that can lead to improved longer term physical and psycho-social outcomes are needed. The EHPs are reliable, valid, acceptable, and responsive tools, but more assessment of EHP outcomes using modern psychometric methods and in the context of women from ethnically diverse backgrounds and in routine clinical care would be beneficial. Given the brevity of the EHP-5, it may be the most appropriate version to use in routine clinical practice, whereas the longer EHP-30, which provides more granularity, is more appropriate for research.

Robotic surgery for bowel endometriosis: a multidisciplinary management of a complex entity

BACKGROUND

Bowel endometriosis impacts quality of life. Treatment requires complex surgical procedures with associated morbidity. Precision approach with robotic surgery leads to organ preservation. Bowel endometriosis requires a multidisciplinary management to improve patient outcomes. This study evaluates perioperative outcomes of bowel endometriosis undergoing multidisciplinary planning and robotic surgery.

METHODS

Consecutive cases of multidisciplinary robotic bowel endometriosis procedures (January 2021-December 2022) were evaluated from a prospectively maintained database in a national endometriosis accredited centre. Patients were managed through a multidisciplinary setting including gynaecologists, colorectal robotic surgeons, and other specialists. Dyschezia (menstrual and non-cyclical) and quality of life were assessed pre- and postoperatively (6 months) through validated questionnaires.

RESULTS

Sixty-eight consecutive cases of robotic bowel endometriosis were included. Median age was 35.0 (30.2-42.0) years. Median body mass index was 24.0 (21.0-26.7) kg/m2. Procedures performed were 48 (70.6%) shavings, 11 (16.2%) deep shavings, 3 (4.4%) disc excisions, and 6 (8.8%) segmental resections. One (1.5%) patient required temporary stoma. Median operating time was 150 (120-180) min. There were no conversions/return to theatre postoperatively. Median endometriotic nodule size was 25.0 (15.5-40.0) mm. Two (2.9%) patients developed postoperative complications. Median length of postoperative stay was 2 (2-4) days. Median follow-up was 12 (7-17) months. One (1.5%) patient recurred. Median menstrual dyschezia score improved from 5.0 (2.0-8.0) to 1.0 (0.0-5.7). Median non-cyclical dyschezia significantly improved (p < 0.001) from 1.0 (0.0-5.7) to 0.0 (0.0-2.0). Median quality of life score improved from 52.5 (35.0-70.0) to 74.5 (60.0-80.0).

CONCLUSIONS

Robotic multidisciplinary approach to bowel endometriosis provides good perioperative outcomes with improvement of dyschezia and quality of life.

First experience with the Hugo™ robot-assisted surgery system for endometriosis: A descriptive study

INTRODUCTION

The Medtronic Hugo™ Robot-assisted Surgery (RAS) system was recently approved for clinical use. We explored the safety and feasibility of this system for endometriosis surgery. The primary outcome was safe case completion without major surgical complications (Clavien-Dindo grade ≤2) and no conversion to open surgery or laparoscopy.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Surgeries for endometriosis performed at the Department of Gynecology, Rigshospitalet, on the Medtronic Hugo™ RAS system were included. Two experienced robotic surgeons performed all surgeries with their usual robotic team. The variables included were patient demographics, peri- and postoperative data, complications and 30-day readmission rate. We used the IDEAL framework 1/2a for surgical innovation in this descriptive study.

RESULTS

The first 12 patients were included. All cases were completed without intraoperative complications or conversion. Four patients experienced Clavien-Dindo grade 1 postoperative complications. No patients were re-admitted within 30 days. Median docking time (17 minutes), console time (87.5 minutes), blood loss (40 mL) and length of hospital stay (1 day) were acceptable compared with previous literature.

CONCLUSIONS

In this pilot study, we found the Medtronic Hugo™ RAS system safe and feasible for robot-assisted surgery for endometriosis. The advent of new robotic systems is welcomed to accelerate the development of technology that will advance surgical care for patients across the globe.

Robotic assisted laparoscopy for deep infiltrating endometriosis

Deep infiltrative endometriosis is a condition affecting up to 15 % of women of childbearing age, defined by extra uterine location of endometrial like tissues. The symptoms of endometriosis range from severe dysmenorrhea to infertility, chronic pelvic pain, bowel dysfunction and urinary tract involvement to name the most common. Endometriosis has an impact on the quality of life of patients, with personal and social consequences. Although medical treatment is indicated in the first instance, surgery may be necessary. Standard laparoscopy has become the gold standard for this surgery. However, surgery for deep infiltrative endometriosis is known to be highly complex, and the significant development of robotic assistance in recent years has had an impact on the evolution of surgical practice. This comprehensive review of the literature provides an overview of the contributions of robotic surgery in the field of endometriosis and gives an insight into the next steps in its development.

Robotic Surgery in Gynaecology: A Retrospective Evaluation of an Experience at a Single Centre

Objective

The aim of this research was to assess the role of robotics and its outcome in gynaecology both in benign and malignant cases in a single centre and provide a critical evaluation of possible advantages of robot assisted surgeries from surgeons' point of view.

Design

A single centre, retrospective observational study.

Population

All women who underwent robotic gynaecological surgeries between 2015 and 2022.

Methods

The Da Vinci Si™ robotic system was used for these surgeries performed by all surgeons at our quaternary care centre, and data were acquired retrospectively through electronic medical records. Descriptive statistical analysis of data was done. Main outcome measures included operative time, estimated blood loss, hospital stay, complications and conversion rates in all cases. Age was analysed as a demographic data.

Outcome

A total of 211 robotic cases were performed including 172 hysterectomies, 20 myomectomies and 19 cases for other gynaecological indications. The mean operating time or hysterectomy and myomectomy was 113 and 129 min, respectively, and haemoglobin drop was 1.34 and 1.2 g/dl, respectively. No conversions to laparotomy were observed in either of the groups. The surgeries for 19 benign gynaecological conditions included ovarian cystectomy, cesarean scar repair and chronic cornual ectopic.

Conclusion

Robotic surgical system helps accomplish several procedures with exceptional laparoscopic skills. Robotic surgery is safe in all types of gynaecological procedures and is a promising alternative for comprehensive gynaecologic surgical care.

Robotic Surgery for Severe Endometriosis: A Preliminary Comparative Study of Cost Estimation

STUDY OBJECTIVE

To compare the postoperative outcomes and the overall expenses between conventional laparoscopy and robotic surgery, in a series of consecutive patients managed for only severe endometriosis in our institute.

DESIGN

A cohort comparative study.

SETTING

Center of Excellence in Multidisciplinary Endometriosis Care.

PATIENTS

A total of 175 symptomatic patients undergoing surgery for only severe endometriosis from March 2021 to August 2022.

INTERVENTIONS

We treated patients with endometriosis involving the digestive tract such as rectum, sigmoid colon, and ileocecal junction by rectal shaving, discoid resection, or segmental resection (141 surgeries) with or without bladder (23 surgeries), sacral plexus (19 surgeries), and diaphragm involvements (14 surgeries).

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Postoperative outcomes were evaluated in terms of total surgical time (total surgical room occupancy time and total operating time), hospitalization period, postoperative complications, rehospitalization, and second surgical procedures. A statistically higher total surgical room occupancy (203 minutes vs 151 minutes) and operating time (150 minutes vs 105 minutes) were observed in the robotic group (p = .001). No differences in terms of mean hospital stay (p = .06), postoperative complications (p = .91), rehospitalization (p = .48), and secondary surgical treatment (p = .78) were identified. Concerning the cost analysis only for disposable supply, the cost of colorectal resection was totaled at 2604 euros for the laparoscopic conventional approach vs 2957 euros for the robotic approach (+352.6 euros, +14%). The cost of rectal disc excision was 1527 euros for the laparoscopic conventional approach vs 1905.85 euros (+378 euros, +25%).

CONCLUSIONS

Our study confirms the feasibility of the robotic approach for the treatment of severe endometriosis, with however a higher cost of robotic approach. Next studies should identify specific indications for robotic surgery, where technical advantages provided by the technology are followed by objective improvement of patients' outcomes.

Robot-assisted laparoscopy does not have demonstrable advantages over conventional laparoscopy in endometriosis surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Endometriosis is a chronic condition affecting 6-10% of women of reproductive age, with endometriosis-related pain and infertility being the leading symptoms. Currently, the gold standard treatment approach to surgery is conventional laparoscopy (CL); however, the increasing availability of robot-assisted surgery is projected as a competitor of CL. This study aimed to compare the perioperative outcomes of robot-assisted laparoscopy (RAL) and CL in endometriosis surgery.

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to compare the effectiveness and safety of these two procedures.

METHODS

A systematic search was conducted in three medical databases. Studies investigating different perioperative outcomes of endometriosis-related surgeries were included. Results are presented as odds ratios (OR) or mean differences (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI).

RESULTS

Our search yielded 2,014 records, of which 13 were eligible for data extraction. No significant differences were detected between the CL and RAL groups in terms of intraoperative complications (OR = 1.07, CI 0.43-2.63), postoperative complications (OR = 1.3, CI 0.73-2.32), number of conversions to open surgery (OR = 1.34, CI 0.76-2.37), length of hospital stays (MD = 0.12, CI 0.33-0.57), blood loss (MD = 16.73, CI 4.18-37.63) or number of rehospitalizations (OR = 0.95, CI 0.13-6.75). In terms of operative times (MD = 28.09 min, CI 11.59-44.59) and operating room times (MD = 51.39 min, CI 15.07-87.72;), the RAL technique remained inferior.

CONCLUSION

RAL does not have statistically demonstrable advantages over CL in terms of perioperative outcomes for endometriosis-related surgery.

Patient-Reported Outcome Measures Used in Randomized Controlled Trials Following Surgical Intervention for Endometriosis: A Structured Review from the AAGL Practice Guidelines Group

OBJECTIVE

No consensus currently exists regarding patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) instruments. This structured review was conducted to identify the PROMs used by randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated surgical treatment in patients with endometriosis.

DATA SOURCES

Two parallel searches were conducted by a medical librarian using Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid Embase, and Cochrane Library for RCTs published from 2000 to July 2022. One search focused on studies reporting quality of life (QoL), and the second search focused on studies reporting pain and sexual, bowel, and bladder function.

METHOD OF STUDY SELECTION

During the title and abstract screening and reference check, 600 results were identified on PROMs relating to QoL and 465 studies on PROMs relating to pain and sexual, bowel, and/or bladder function and an evaluation of 17 and 12 studies conducted, respectively. The inclusion criteria involved selecting RCTs that focused on surgical intervention and assessing QoL, pain, and sexual, bowel, and/or bladder function using PROMs.

TABULATION, INTEGRATION, AND RESULTS

Covidence software was used to organize and identify duplicate articles through screening. We developed a data extraction form to collect key information about each included study, as well as the pertinent PROMs used in the study. Assessment of the risk of bias of each study was also performed. A total of 19 studies were identified involving 2089 participants and a total of 16 PROMs used across the studies; 9 of 19 studies (47%) were rated as having a low risk of bias. There were no high-risk studies identified in this review.

CONCLUSION

This study identified a large number of RCTs in surgical treatment of endometriosis that used various PROMs to assess QoL, pain, and bladder, bowel, and sexual function. The PROMs used by high-quality RCTs for QoL include Endometriosis Health Profile-30, Endometriosis Health Profile-5, Short-Form 36, Short-Form 12, and EQ-5D; for bowel-related symptoms Knowles-Eccersley-Scott-Symptom Questionnaire, Gastrointestinal Quality of Life Index, and Cleveland Clinic Fecal Incontinence Severity Scoring System/Wexner; for bladder-related function Bristol Female Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms, International Prostate Symptom Score, Pelvic Organ Prolapse/Urinary Incontinence Sexual Function Questionnaire, and Urinary Symptom Profile; and finally for sexual function Pelvic Organ Prolapse/Urinary Incontinence Sexual Function Questionnaire and Sexual Activity Questionnaire. Unlike other domains, only one tool (visual analog scale) was the dominant PROM used for the assessment of pain. In addition, the use of more than one PROM in each study to assess different aspects of patient's health and pain symptoms did not become prevalent until after 2015.

Initial experience of robotically assisted endometriosis surgery with a novel robotic system: first case series in a tertiary care center

Endometriosis is a benign disease requiring surgery if medical treatment can not achieve symptom control. Laparoscopy remains the gold standard and robotic assistance can be beneficial in complex cases. Robot-assisted radical endometriosis excision using the Hugo™ RAS system is a novel approach. The aim of this study is to describe its setting and outcomes in a series of patients in a robotic surgery center. Endometriosis patients who consecutively underwent robot-assisted surgery with the Hugo™ RAS system (Medtronic, USA) were retrospectively enrolled. Disease-specific symptoms before and after surgery, endometriosis stage, as well as perioperative and intraoperative variables including system setup were collected. Early post-operative complications (< 30 days) and follow-up (up to 3 months) were reported. All procedures were completed robotically. Port placement followed the "bridge" configuration with a "compact" docking. The median operative time was 186.5 min (IQR 174-220), the median estimated blood loss 50 ml (IQR 0-100). An intraoperative complication occurred in one patient (6.6%), a bladder laceration with postoperative antibiotic treatment. The median lenght of hospital stay (LOS) was 3 days (IQR 3-4). Surgery achieved a statistically significant decrease in symptoms: mean dysmenorrhea (9.50 ± 0.83 versus 1.7 ± 2.26; p = 0.001), dyschezia (4.27 ± 3.61 versus 2.40 ± 2.92; p = 0.026), dysuria (2.73 ± 3.39 versus 1.87 ± 2.41; p = 0.358), dyspareunia (6.53 ± 3.15 versus 2.93 ± 2.89; p = 0.002) and chronic pelvic pain (8.8 ± 1.20 versus 3.20 ± 2.39; p = 0.001). The integration of this platform in the described configuration was safe with regular perioperative outcomes and significant improvement in symptoms. Prospective comparative studies with a larger cohort and longer follow-up are needed to assess potential advantages over the current gold standard.

Expanding Robotic-Assisted Surgery in Gynecology Using the Potential of an Advanced Robotic System

Minimally invasive surgery (MIS) in gynecology was introduced to achieve the same surgical objectives as traditional open surgery while minimizing trauma to surrounding tissues, reducing pain, accelerating recovery, and improving overall patient outcomes. Minimally invasive approaches, such as laparoscopic and robotic-assisted surgeries, have become the standard for many gynecological procedures. In this review, we aim to summarize the advantages and main limitations to a broader adoption of robotic-assisted surgery compared to laparoscopic surgeries in gynecology. We present a new surgical system, the Dexter Robotic System™ (Distalmotion, Switzerland), that facilitates the transition from laparoscopy expertise to robotic-assisted surgery.

Assessing the role of robotic surgery versus laparoscopic surgery in patients with a diagnosis of endometriosis: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Surgical management of endometriosis can be carried out with the traditional standard laparoscopic technique or the robotic surgery technique; however, it is not clear if there is a significant difference between techniques. This meta-analysis aims to evaluate and compare the impact of robotic and standard laparoscopic techniques in endometriosis regarding the clinical outcome.

METHODS

Studies comparing robotic surgery to laparoscopic surgery for endometriosis were among the studies from various languages that met the inclusion criteria. Using dichotomous and continuous random-effect models, the results of these investigations (surgery time, hospitalization time, blood loss, complications, and conversion rate) were examined, and the mean difference with 95% confidence intervals was computed.

RESULTS

Eight studies from 2013 to 2022 were selected for the current analysis including 1741 patients with endometriosis. The studied data revealed a statistically significant (P = .01) lower operation time related to laparoscopic surgery compared with the robotic technique. In addition, the hospitalization time of laparoscopic surgery is significantly (P = .03) lower than that of robotic surgery. On the other hand, blood loss, rehospitalization, postoperative and intraoperative complications, and conversion rates were not significantly different between both techniques. Heterogeneity values were variable according to the analysis factor, from 0% to 91%.

CONCLUSION

Both robotic and standard laparoscopic techniques have similar outcomes regarding blood loss, rehospitalization, conversion rate, and rate of complication. However, the substantial difference between techniques was in favor of standard laparoscopic surgery regarding operation and hospitalization time.

What is the role of robotic surgery in ovarian cystectomy with fertility preservation?

To investigate the role of robotic single-site (RSS) ovarian cystectomy in fertility preservation, which was compared with single-port laparoscopic (SPL) surgery based on AMH changes. We retrospectively analyzed medical records of total 156 patients who underwent SPL (n = 72) or RSS (n = 84) surgery with the da Vinci® Si or Xi system. The pre/post-operative AMH levels and total diameter of ovarian cysts were measured. In addition to the surgical method, AMH changes were compared according to the laterality, multiplicity, and pathology of ovarian cysts. A comparison of the characteristics of the SPL group and RSS group, revealed that there were no significant differences in the average age, the diameter of the ovarian cyst, and the number of locule. There were also no statistical differences between the pre-operative and post-operative AMH levels and the average surgical time including the docking time in robotic surgery. A comparison based on the surgical methods, revealed that the decrease in post-operative AMH was lower in the RSS group (24.2 ± 35.9%) than in the SPL group (34.9 ± 29.1%) significantly (p = 0.044). In patients with endometriosis, the decrease in AMH was greater, than that in patients without endometriosis. A longer operation time, larger ovarian cysts and multi-locular cysts were associated with lower AMH level in both the SPL and RSS groups (Pearson correlation coefficient: - 0.320, p = 0.0001, - 0.218, p = 0.007, - 0.236, p = 0.003, respectively). RSS ovarian cystectomy could be a promising new therapeutic option for fertility preservation in complex cases to avoid an additional side port.

En-block butterfly excision of posterior compartment deep endometriosis: The first experience with the new surgical robot Hugo™ RAS

Background

Minimally invasive surgery is the gold standard treatment for deep endometriosis when medical management fails. In selected cases, such as when bowel or urinary tract are involved, robotic assisted surgery can be useful due to its characteristics of high dexterity and manoeuvrability. This is the first case of robotic en-bloc excision of posterior compartment deep endometriosis performed with the new HugoTM RAS system.

Objective

The purpose of this video article is to show for the first time the feasibility of bowel surgery for deep endometriosis with this new robotic device.

Materials and Methods

A 24-years-old woman affected by severe dysmenorrhea, chronic pelvic pain, dyschezia and dyspareunia underwent to deep endometriosis excision using the new robotic platform HugoTM RAS system at the Unit of Gynaecological Oncology, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, Rome, Italy.

Main outcome measures

Intraoperative data, docking set up, post-operative outcomes up to three months follow up were evaluated.

Results

The surgical procedure was carried out without intra-operative or post-operative complications, operative time (OT) was 200 minutes, while docking time was 8 minutes. No system errors or faults in the robotic arms were registered. Post-operative complete disease-related symptoms relief was reported.

Conclusion

According to our results, the introduction of this new robotic platform in the surgical management of deep endometriosis seems to be feasible, especially in advanced cases. However, further studies are needed to demonstrate the benefits of this surgical system and the advantages of robotic surgery compared to laparoscopy in this subset of patients.

Robotic-assisted versus conventional laparoscopic approach in patients with large rectal endometriotic nodule: the evaluation of safety and complications

AIM

The aim was to compare postoperative complications in patients undergoing the excision of a rectal endometriotic nodule over 3 cm by a robotic-assisted versus a conventional laparoscopic approach.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective cohort study evaluating prospectively collected data. The main interventions included rectal shaving, disc excision or colorectal resection. All the surgeries were performed in one endometriosis reference institute. To evaluate factors significantly associated with the risk of anastomosis leakage or fistula and bladder atony, we conducted a multivariate logistic regression model.

RESULTS

A total of 548 patients with rectal endometriotic nodule over 3 cm in diameter (#ENZIAN C3) were included in the final analysis. The demography and clinical characteristics of women managed by the robotic-assisted (n = 97) approach were similar to those of patients who underwent conventional laparoscopy (n = 451). The multivariate logistic regression demonstrated that the surgical approach (robotic-assisted vs. laparoscopic) was not associated with the rate of anastomosis leakage or fistula (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.2, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.3-4.0) and bladder dysfunction (aOR 0.5, 95% CI 0.1-1.8). A rectal nodule located lower than 6 cm from the anal verge was significantly associated with anastomosis leakage (aOR 4.1, 95% CI 1.4-10.8) and bladder atony (aOR 4.3, 95% CI 1.5-12.3). Anastomosis leakage was also associated with smoking (aOR 3.2, 95% CI 1.4-7.4), significant vaginal infiltration (aOR 2.7, 95% CI 1.2-6.7) and excision of nodules involving sacral roots (aOR 5.6, 95% CI 1.7-15.5).

CONCLUSION

The robotic-assisted approach was not associated with increased risk of main postoperative complications compared to conventional laparoscopy for the treatment of large rectal endometriotic nodules.

Robotic Surgery for Bladder Endometriosis: A Systematic Review and Approach

INTRODUCTION

Women with bladder endometriosis often present with more advanced stages of endometriosis. Robotic surgery has emerged as a promising approach to the management of bladder endometriosis. This systematic review aims to analyze the current literature on robotic surgery for bladder endometriosis and describe our systematic approach to surgical treatment.

METHODS

This review followed the PRISMA guidelines, which ensured a comprehensive and transparent approach to selecting and evaluating relevant studies. We conducted a thorough literature search to identify studies that investigated the use of robotic surgery for bladder endometriosis. Relevant databases were searched, and inclusion and exclusion criteria were applied to select eligible studies. Data extraction and analysis were performed to assess the outcomes and effectiveness of robotic surgery for the treatment of bladder endometriosis.

RESULTS

We did not find any randomized clinical trials with the use of robotics in the treatment of bladder endometriosis. We found only two retrospective studies comparing robotic surgery with laparoscopy, and another retrospective study comparing robotic surgery, laparoscopy, and laparotomy in the treatment of bladder endometriosis. All the other 12 studies were solely case reports. Despite the lack of robust evidence in the literature, the studies demonstrated that robotic surgery is feasible and is associated with reduced postoperative pain, shorter hospital stays, and faster recovery.

CONCLUSIONS

The utilization of robotic technology is a promising option for the surgical management of bladder endometriosis. We advocate a surgical systematic approach for the robotic treatment of bladder endometriosis. Robotic technology, with its 3D vision, instrumental degrees of freedom, and precision, particularly in suturing, may provide potential benefits over traditional laparoscopy.

Improved quality of life (EHP-30) in patients with endometriosis after surgical treatment

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to evaluate the quality of life of patients with endometriosis before and after surgical treatment.

METHODS

An observational, longitudinal, and prospective study was conducted with 102 women with pelvic pain and endometriosis that was unimproved by clinical treatment and indicated for surgical treatment. The patients' quality of life was assessed using the 30-item Endometriosis Health Profile (EHP-30) questionnaire before and 3 and 6 months after surgery. The statistical tests were analyzed using the Statistical Package for Social Sciences version 17.0, and the Friedman test was used.

RESULTS

There was a reduction in EHP-30 scores 3 and 6 months after surgery compared to before surgery, as well as 6 months after surgery compared to 3 months after surgery, in the central questionnaire (PART 1) and in Sections A, B, C, E, and F (p<0.0001). For Section D, there was a reduction in scores 6 months after surgery compared to before surgery (p<0.0001).

CONCLUSION

Surgical treatment of endometriosis improves quality of life in several areas assessed by the EHP-30 questionnaire.

Does Robot Assisted Laparoscopy (RAL) Have an Advantage in Preservation of Ovarian Reserve in Endometriosis Surgery? Comparison of Single-Port Access (SPA) RAL and SPA Laparoscopy

The purpose of this study was to compare single-port access (SPA) laparoscopy and SPA robot assisted laparoscopy (RAL) for endometriosis with respect to ovarian reserve preservation and surgical outcomes. Clinical factors affecting any reduction in ovarian function after surgery were also evaluated. Patients with endometriosis who underwent SPA laparoscopy (n = 87) or RAL (n = 78) were retrospectively reviewed. Patients' baseline characteristics, including the severity of endometriosis and surgical outcomes including surgical complexity, were collected. To assess the preservation of ovarian reserve after surgery, serum anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH) levels before surgery, at two weeks, and at three months after surgery were collected. Age, ovarian cyst size, location of cyst, complexity of surgery, and the severity of endometriosis were associated with the reduction in AMH levels after surgery. The severity of endometriosis was higher in the RAL group than in the SPA group. There were no significant differences in other clinical baseline characteristics, including preoperative AMH levels. For surgical outcomes, radical surgery was more frequently performed in the RAL group. In univariate and multivariate linear regression analyses, age, ovarian cyst size, location of cyst, complexity of surgery, and the severity of endometriosis were associated with the reduction in AMH levels after surgery. Incorporating surgical approaches and risk factors for postoperative ovarian function decrease, RAL was more beneficial than SPA laparoscopy for the preservation of ovarian reserve in patients with mild endometriosis (stage I/II) (postoperative 3 month AMH reduction rate (%), SPA laparoscopy vs. RAL, 33.51 ± 19.98 vs. 23.58 ± 14.98, p = 0.04) and in patients who underwent non-complex surgery (postoperative 3 month AMH reduction rate (%), SPA laparoscopy vs. RAL, 37.89 ± 22.37 vs. 22.37 ± 17.49, p = 0.022). SPA RAL may have advantages over SPA laparoscopy in ovarian function preservation, especially in patients with mild endometriosis and patients who have undergone a non-complex surgery.

Quality of Life in Women after Deep Endometriosis Surgery: Comparison with Spanish Standardized Values

The quality of life (QoL) of women who have been surgically treated for endometriosis may be severely impaired. Therefore, QoL can be a determining factor in the recovery of these patients. The aims of this study were to evaluate if the QoL of women surgically treated for deep endometriosis differs from a healthy age-matched population from Catalonia (Spain) and to analyze the QoL of these women considering concomitant events. This is an observational cross-sectional study, where 112 women (between 18 and 48 years old), with endometriosis treated by surgery at Hospital Universitario La Paz (Madrid, Spain), were enrolled to assess the QoL using the second version of the 12-item short form (SF-12) questionnaire. The QoL in these women were tested against a reference population of healthy women using a standardized one-sample comparison method. In addition, the QoL was compared according to the pathophysiology and type of surgery. In women with endometriosis, the physical health component, but not mental health component, was positively correlated with age (r = 0.19; p-Value = 0.048). In addition, physical (20.3 ± 29.2) and social functions (29.7 ± 38.3) and the overall physical health component (37.8 ± 19.4) were significantly lower than the reference population. On the contrary, the body pain (64.1 ± 41.2), emotional role (62.5 ± 42.2), mental health (54.4 ± 26.0), vitality (59.3 ± 31.2), and the overall mental health component (59.4 ± 26.6) had significantly higher scores than the reference. The anatomical compartment of endometriosis, reintervention, bowel nodule resection, and fertility preservation did not show statistical differences in QoL. Women with deep endometriosis had worse physical and social functions, and the overall physical health, compared to the norm in Spanish women. Bodily pain, emotional role, vitality, and the overall mental health improved. These areas could be considered protective factors in this disease. Considering the importance of QoL in adjustments in mental and physical health, it would be necessary to improve these areas of QoL in women surgically treated for deep endometriosis.

Robotic versus laparoscopic surgery for severe deep endometriosis: protocol for a randomised controlled trial (ROBEndo trial)

INTRODUCTION

Endometriosis is a common gynaecological disease affecting around 10% of fertile-aged women, causing severe pain symptoms. Deep endometriosis is defined as endometriotic implants that infiltrate the underlying organs more than 5 mm in depth. Surgery for deep endometriosis requires advanced multidisciplinary surgical technique, often in very difficult surgical conditions, with increased risks of complications. Robotic surgery offers a high-definition three-dimensional view and articulating instruments that may allow more precise dissection than conventional laparoscopy in the pelvic area. The superiority of robotic surgery has not, however, been provedin randomised controlled studies, and there is a lack of long-term outcome data. Advanced endometriosis surgery offers an excellent platform to study the feasibility and long-term outcomes of robotic surgery compared with conventional laparoscopy.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

ROBEndo is a prospective, randomised, controlled clinical trial in a single-centre setting. Patients with deep endometriosis verified by MRI needing surgery at Oulu University Hospital (Oulu, Finland) will be considered eligible. 70 patients will be allocated 1:1 to receive either robotic-assisted or conventional laparoscopic surgery in two strata: radical surgery (with the removal of the uterus and adnexae) and gynaecological organ-sparing surgery. The primary outcome will be the surgical outcome as regards to pain symptoms measured on numeric rating scale (NRS) questionnaires at 24 hours and 6, 12 and 24 months postoperatively. As secondary outcomes, intraoperative measures, enhanced recovery after surgery factors, complications, cost and long-term quality of life measured with Endometriosis Health Profile-30 (EHP-30), Female Sexual Function Index (FSFI) and 15-dimensional (15D) questionnaires will be compared.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This study has been approved by the Northern Ostrobothnian Hospital District Ethical Committee at Oulu University Hospital (212/2021). Informed consent will be obtained during the preoperative check-up by the operating gynaecologist. The results will be published in peer-reviewed international journals.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT05179109.

Robotic surgery in gynaecology: Scientific Impact Paper No. 71 (July 2022)

The use of robotic-assisted keyhole surgery in gynaecology has expanded in recent years owing to technical advances. These include 3D viewing leading to improved depth perception, limitation of tremor, potential for greater precision and discrimination of tissues, a shorter learning curve and improved comfort for surgeons compared with conventional keyhole and open abdominal surgery. Robotic-assisted keyhole surgery, compared with conventional keyhole surgery, improves surgical performance without increasing operating time, minimises blood loss and intra- or postoperative complications, while reducing the need to revert to abdominal surgery. Moreover, surgeons using a robot experience fewer skeletomuscular problems of their own in the short and long term than those operating without a robot as an additional tool. This Scientific Impact Paper looks at the use of a robot in different fields of gynaecological surgery. A robot could be considered safe and a more effective surgical tool than conventional keyhole surgery for women who have to undergo complex gynaecology surgery or have associated medical issues such as body-mass index (BMI) at 30 kg/m² or above or lung problems. The introduction of the use of robots in keyhole surgery has resulted in a decrease in the number of traditional open surgeries and the risk of conversion to open surgery after traditional keyhole surgery; both of which should be considered when examining the cost-benefit of using a robot. Limitations of robotic-assisted surgery remain the associated higher costs. In womb cancer surgery there is good evidence that introducing robotics into the service improves outcomes for women and may reduce costs.

Outcomes of robotic and laparoscopic surgery for benign gynaecological disease: a systematic review

Benign gynaecological diseases are usually treated with minimally invasive approaches. Robotic surgery seems an alternative to laparoscopic surgery. No definitive conclusions have yet been made regarding comparison of robotic versus laparoscopic surgery for benign diseases. In this scenario, we performed a systematic review in order to assess the advantages and disadvantages of laparoscopy versus robotic surgery and conclude whether laparoscopy should be replaced by robotic surgery for the treatment of benign gynaecological conditions, following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) Statement. We included 64 studies: no significant difference was observed regarding overall complication rate; no significant benefit of robotic approach was demonstrated regarding length of hospital stay and conversion to laparotomy; furthermore, robotic surgery is more easily used by non-experienced surgeons, while it is more expensive and characterised by longer operative time. In conclusion, current evidence indicates neither statistically significant nor clinically meaningful differences in surgical outcomes between robotic and laparoscopic surgeries for benign gynaecological diseases. Impact statementWhat is already known on this subject? Benign gynaecological diseases are usually treated with minimally invasive approaches. Nevertheless, no definitive conclusions have yet been made regarding comparison of robotic versus laparoscopic surgery for benign diseases.What do the results of this study add? No significant difference was observed regarding overall complication rate; no significant benefit of robotic approach was demonstrated regarding length of hospital stay and conversion to laparotomy; furthermore, robotic surgery is more easily used by non-experienced surgeon, while it is more expensive and characterised by longer operative time.What are the implications of these findings for clinical practice and/or further research? Robotic surgery should not replace laparoscopy for the treatment of benign gynaecological conditions; in addition, gynaecologic surgeon should offer robotic surgery for benign diseases only after a proper counselling and a balanced decision-making process involving the patient.

Peri- and postoperative outcomes in patients with endometriosis undergoing hysterectomy

OBJECTIVES

To assess whether hysterectomy in patients with endometriosis is associated with higher proportion of complications compared with patients without, and whether route of hysterectomy affects this outcome.

STUDY DESIGN

This is a population-based retrospective cohort study. Data were prospectively obtained from three National Swedish Registers. Patients undergoing a benign hysterectomy between 2015 and 2017 in Sweden were included in the study and were grouped according to a histology-proven diagnosis of endometriosis. Different hysterectomy modes were compared in patients with endometriosis. Perioperative data and postoperative complications up to 1 year after surgery were collected and measured.

RESULTS

In all, 8,747 patients underwent a benign hysterectomy, and 1,166 patients with endometriosis was compared with 7,581 patients without. Patients with endometriosis had higher proportion of complications (adjusted Odds ratio aOR 1.2, 95% CI 1.0-1.4), were more often converted to abdominal hysterectomy (aOR 1.7, 95% CI 1.1-2.6), had higher estimated blood loss (EBL) (200-500 ml; aOR 1.8, 95% CI 1.4-2.3, >500 ml; aOR 3.1, 95% CI 2.2-4.4) and a longer operative time (1-2 h; aOR 2.1, 95% CI 1.4-3.2, >2 h; aOR 4.3, 95% CI 2.7-6.6) than endometriosis-free patients. The conversion rate was 13.8 times higher in total laparoscopic hysterectomy (TLH) compared with robotic-assisted laparoscopic hysterectomy (RATLH) (aOR 13.8, 95% CI 3.6-52.4).

CONCLUSION

Higher conversion rate, higher EBL and higher frequency of complications were seen in patients with endometriosis. RATLH was associated with lower conversion rate compared to TLH.

Update of Robotic Surgery in Benign Gynecological Pathology: Systematic Review

Background and Objectives: Since the Food and Drug Administration's (FDA) approval in 2005, the application of robotic surgery (RS) in gynecology has been adopted all over the world. This study aimed to provide an update on RS in benign gynecological pathology by reporting the scientific recommendations and high-value scientific literature available to date. Materials and Methods: A systematic review of the literature was performed. Prospective randomized clinical trials (RCT) and large retrospective trials were included in the present review. Results: Twenty-two studies were considered eligible for the review: eight studies regarding robotic myomectomy, five studies on robotic hysterectomy, five studies about RS in endometriosis treatment, and four studies on robotic pelvic organ prolapse (POP) treatment. Overall, 12 RCT and 10 retrospective studies were included in the analysis. In total 269,728 patients were enrolled, 1721 in the myomectomy group, 265,100 in the hysterectomy group, 1527 in the endometriosis surgical treatment group, and 1380 patients received treatment for POP. Conclusions: Currently, a minimally invasive approach is suggested in benign gynecological pathologies. According to the available evidence, RS has comparable clinical outcomes compared to laparoscopy (LPS). RS allowed a growing number of patients to gain access to MIS and benefit from a minimally invasive treatment, due to a flattened learning curve and enhanced dexterity and visualization.

Cosmetic Outcome of Robotic Surgery Compared to Laparoscopic Surgery for Benign Gynecologic Disease

Background and Objectives:

This study was designed to compare patients who have undergone conventional laparoscopic surgery with those who undergone multiport robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery for benign gynecological diseases regarding cosmetic results, patient satisfaction, and quality of life.

Methods:

Sixty-four patients who underwent either robot-assisted or conventional laparoscopic surgery for benign gynecological diseases from July 1, 2019 to March 31, 2020 at Acibadem Mehmet Ali Aydinlar University Hospital were enrolled. Patients were evaluated using the Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale, visual analog scale for cosmetic satisfaction, body image questionnaire, and 12-item Short Form Survey six months postoperatively.

Results:

The median patient assessment scale and observer assessment scale (general) values were significantly higher in the robotic group than in the laparoscopic group. The mean body image questionnaire (cosmetic section) and visual analog scale values were significantly higher in the laparoscopic group than in the robotic group. No significant differences in body image scale, body image questionnaire 9–10, and 12-item Short Form Survey values were observed between the groups. The number of patients with previous surgical history was significantly higher in the laparoscopic group than in the robotic group.

Conclusion:

Although esthetic concerns are not a priority consideration when deciding an appropriate surgical method, the higher cosmetic satisfaction rate in the laparoscopic group than in the robotic group suggests that cosmetic results should be discussed with patients after evaluating other factors.

Robot-assisted laparoscopy for deep infiltrating endometriosis: a retrospective French multicentric study (2008-2019) using the Society of European Robotic Gynecological Surgery endometriosis database

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed at assessing perioperative results of robot-assisted laparoscopy (RAL) in the context of deep infiltrating endometriosis (DIE).

METHODS

This retrospective French multicentric study included all patients with DIE who underwent surgical treatment managed by RAL (Da Vinci® System). From November 2008 to June 2019, patients were included in a single European database, in Robotic Assisted Laparoscopic Gynecologic Surgery, with Society of European Robotic Gynecological Surgery collaboration. Patients had different DIE sites as follows: gynecological, urological, or digestive, or combinations of these. Surgical procedures and perioperative complications were evaluated. To assess complications, patients were divided into the following four groups according to surgical procedure and DIE site: gynecological only; gynecological and urological; gynecological and digestive; and gynecological, urological, and digestive.

RESULTS

A total of 460 patients treated at one of eight health-care facilities from November 2008 to June 2019 were included. Median operative time was 245 min (IQR 186-320), surgeon console time was 138 ± 75 min and estimated blood loss was 70.0 mL ± 107 mL. Among this patient sample, 42.1% had a multidisciplinary surgical approach with a digestive or urology surgeon in addition to gynecology surgeon (25.5% and 16.6% of cases, respectively). Among those with intraoperative complications (n = 25, 5.4%) were primarily conversion to laparotomy (n = 6, 2.0%), transfusion (n = 2, 0.6%), and organ wounds (n = 8, 1.7%). Overall, 5.6% had severe postoperative complications (Clavien-Dindo classification ≥ Grade 3).

CONCLUSION

This is among the largest published series addressing RAL for DIE. Interest in this procedure appears promising, with no observed increases in blood loss or in peri- or post-operative complications. DIE laparoscopic surgery can require complex surgical procedures performed by multidisciplinary surgical teams. Thus, it may be one of the best candidates for RAL within gynecology surgery.

The current role of robotic surgery in endometriosis management

INTRODUCTION

Endometriosis is a chronic inflammatory disease that affects approximately 10%-15% of women of childbearing age. Laparoscopic surgery is the preferred surgical approach. Recently, robotic surgery has been used for benign gynecologic surgery, but its role in the treatment of endometriosis is still unknown.

AREAS COVERED

We included studies that evaluated the outcomes of robotic surgery for endometriosis. Using the keywords 'endometriosis' and 'robotics', a comprehensive literature search on PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library was performed in July 2021.

EXPERT OPINION

Robotic surgery for endometriosis has similar outcomes as conventional laparoscopy, with no evidence of increased complication rates. Despite the non-inferiority of the surgical route, the associated costs of robotic surgery limit its availability. Rapid development of robot-assisted surgery necessitates long-term prospective randomized controlled trials. However, the limitations of robotic surgery should not be overlooked. If robotic surgery can facilitate the spread of minimally invasive surgery, it will be necessary to evaluate the cost, availability, complexity of the lesions, and most importantly, the results of patient satisfaction and values of value-based medicine.

SURGICAL TECHNIQUES FOR THE TREATMENT OF RECTAL ENDOMETRIOSIS: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW OF RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS AND OBSERVATIONAL STUDIES

BACKGROUND

Endometriosis is a common disease in reproductive-age women and it is estimated to occur in up to 50% of those with infertility. Intestinal involvement is reported in up to a third of the cases. This condition is related to chronic pain and loss of quality of life, resulting in emotional, social and economic costs. Treatment consists of hormonal block and surgical resection, with variable side effects and efficacy. The best choice for surgical treatment for rectal endometriosis is a matter of discussion regarding the indication and the best technique to be employed.

OBJECTIVE

To summarize data on indications, results and complications of surgical techniques for the treatment of rectal endometriosis.

METHODS

This comprehensive systematic review is a compilation of the available literature and discussion, carried out by a team with experience in the surgical treatment of intestinal endometriosis. Data regarding indications, results and complications of conservative and radical techniques for the surgical treatment of rectal endometriosis was carefully reviewed. Searches of PubMed, EMBASE, and CENTRAL up to May 2021 were performed to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies that compared at least two of the three surgical techniques of interest (i.e., shaving, discoid resection, segmental resection).

RESULTS

One RCT and nine case series studies with a total of 3,327 patients met the eligibility criteria. Participants ages ranged from a mean of 30.0 to 37.9 years old. Mean follow-up ranged from 1.2 to 42.76 months. With regards the methodological quality, overall the included studies presented a low risk of bias in the majority of the domains. Surgical treatment of rectal endometriosis is indicated for patients with obstructive symptoms and those with pain scores above 7/10. Patients with disease involving beyond muscularis propria of the rectum, documented in magnetic resonance imaging or transvaginal pelvic ultrasound with intestinal preparation, are candidates for discoid or segmental resection. The presence of multifocal disease, extension greater than 3 cm and infiltration greater than 50% of the loop circumference favor the radical technique. The distance from the lesion to the anal verge, age, symptoms and reproductive desire are other factors that influence the choice of the technique to be employed. The risk of complications and unfavorable functional results seems to be directly related to the complexity of the procedure.

CONCLUSION

The choice of surgical technique performed for the treatment of rectal endometriosis is a matter of discussion and depends not only on the preoperative staging, but also on the patient's expectations, risks and potential complications, recurrence rates and the expertise of the multidisciplinary team.

Endometriosis: Epidemiology, Classification, Pathogenesis, Treatment and Genetics (Review of Literature)

Endometriosis is a “mysterious” disease and its exact cause has not yet been established. Among the etiological factors, congenital, environmental, epigenetic, autoimmune and allergic factors are listed. It is believed that the primary mechanism of the formation of endometriosis foci is retrograde menstruation, i.e., the passage of menstrual blood through the fallopian tubes into the peritoneal cavity and implantation of exfoliated endometrial cells. However, since this mechanism is also observed in healthy women, other factors must also be involved in the formation of endometriosis foci. Endometriosis is in many women the cause of infertility, chronic pain and the deterioration of the quality of life. It also represents a significant financial burden on health systems. The article presents a review of the literature on endometriosis—a disease affecting women throughout the world.

Robotic-assisted laparoscopy is a feasible method for resection of deep infiltrating endometriosis, especially in the rectosigmoid area

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to compare outcomes of mini-invasive surgical treatment of endometriosis, especially conventional laparoscopy with robotic-assisted laparoscopy, and to evaluate the quality of life.

METHODS

One hundred three consecutive patients with endometriosis who had surgery from 2014 to 2017 owing to an indication of pain were enrolled in this retrospective study. The majority (n = 77, 75%) of patients underwent conventional laparoscopy and 18 (17%) had robotic-assisted laparoscopy. The quality of life was postoperatively assessed with a questionnaire.

RESULTS

The rates of parametrectomy (76% vs. 45%,) and rectovaginal resection (28% vs. 4%) were significantly higher in robotic-assisted laparoscopy than in laparoscopy. Additionally, the rate of bowel operations (50% vs. 17%), especially the shaving technique, was higher in robotic-assisted laparoscopy surgery than in laparoscopy (39% vs. 8%). There was no difference in the rate of postoperative complications between laparoscopy and robotic-assisted laparoscopy. Most (91%) of the patients who answered the questionnaire felt that surgical treatment had relieved their pain. In the laparoscopic and robotic-assisted groups, 88% of respondents felt that their quality of life had improved after surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

This study suggests that robotic-assisted laparoscopy is a feasible method to resect deep infiltrating endometriosis, especially in the rectosigmoid area.

The Evidence Behind Robot-Assisted Abdominopelvic Surgery : A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Use of robot-assisted surgery has increased dramatically since its advent in the 1980s, and nearly all surgical subspecialties have adopted it. However, whether it has advantages compared with laparoscopy or open surgery is unknown.

PURPOSE

To assess the quality of evidence and outcomes of robot-assisted surgery compared with laparoscopy and open surgery in adults.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched from inception to April 2021.

STUDY SELECTION

Randomized controlled trials that compared robot-assisted abdominopelvic surgery with laparoscopy, open surgery, or both.

DATA EXTRACTION

Two reviewers independently extracted study data and risk of bias.

DATA SYNTHESIS

A total of 50 studies with 4898 patients were included. Of the 39 studies that reported incidence of Clavien-Dindo complications, 4 (10%) showed fewer complications with robot-assisted surgery. The majority of studies showed no difference in intraoperative complications, conversion rates, and long-term outcomes. Overall, robot-assisted surgery had longer operative duration than laparoscopy, but no obvious difference was seen versus open surgery.

LIMITATIONS

Heterogeneity was present among and within the included surgical subspecialties, which precluded meta-analysis. Several trials may not have been powered to assess relevant differences in outcomes.

CONCLUSION

There is currently no clear advantage with existing robotic platforms, which are costly and increase operative duration. With refinement, competition, and cost reduction, future versions have the potential to improve clinical outcomes without the existing disadvantages.

PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE

None. (PROSPERO: CRD42020182027).

Artificial intelligence-the future is now

The pros and cons of artificial intelligence in assisted reproductive technology are presented.

Robot-assisted Transvaginal Natural Orifice Transluminal Endoscopic Surgery for Management of Endometriosis: A Pilot Study of 33 Cases

STUDY OBJECTIVE

To describe the surgical techniques and short-term outcomes for 33 cases of robot-assisted transvaginal natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (RvNOTES) to treat endometriosis.

DESIGN

Retrospective case series study.

SETTING

Academic tertiary care university hospital in Houston, TX.

PATIENTS

Patients who underwent RvNOTES resection of endometriosis between March 2020 and March 2021.

INTERVENTIONS

RvNOTES.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

A total of 33 cases of patients, with pathology-confirmed endometriosis, who underwent RvNOTES total hysterectomy with resection of endometriosis were included in the study. Thirty-two cases were completed successfully by RvNOTES, and 1 case was converted to robotic transumbilical single-incision laparoscopic surgery plus 1 additional port owing to an obliterated posterior cul-de-sac and upper abdominal wall endometriosis. The average operative time was 141.93 ± 40.22 (85-264) minutes, and the mean estimated blood loss was 52.25 ± 33.82 (25-150) mL. The mean preoperative pain score using the visual analog scale (VAS) score was 8.08 ± 2.39 (2-10). The mean VAS pain score 1 week after surgery was 6.73 ± 2.62 (0-10), which was significantly lower than the preoperative scores (p = .059). The mean VAS pain score in the second and third week after surgery was 4.81 ± 2.42 (0-9) and 2.63 ± 2.36 (0-7) respectively, which were both significantly lower than those before surgery (p = .001). There were 4 postoperative complications: urinary tract infection, pneumonia, headache requiring admission, and conversion disorder.

CONCLUSION

RvNOTES is a safe and feasible approach for the treatment of endometriosis, with promising short-term improvements in pain.

Comparison of perioperative outcomes between standard laparoscopic and robot-assisted approach in patients with rectosigmoid endometriosis

INTRODUCTION

Robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery (RALS) has gained widespread application in several surgical specialties. Previous studies on the feasibility and safety of RALS vs standard laparoscopy (S-LPS) for rectosigmoid endometriosis are limited and reported conflicting data. This study aims to compare S-LPS and RALS in patients with rectosigmoid endometriosis in terms of perioperative surgical and clinical data.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This is a multicentric, observational, prospective cohort study including 44 patients affected by rectosigmoid endometriosis referred to two tertiary referral centers for endometriosis from September 2018 to September 2019. Patients were divided into two groups: 22 patients underwent S-LPS, and 22 underwent RALS. Our primary outcome was to compare operative time (from skin incision to suture) between the two groups. Secondary outcomes included: operative room time (patient entry into operative room and patient out), estimated blood loss, laparotomic conversion rate, length of hospital stay, perioperative complications, and evaluation of endometriosis-related symptoms at 12-month follow up.

RESULTS

The two groups were comparable regarding preoperative and surgical data, except for higher rates of hysterectomies and bilateral uterosacral ligament removal procedures in the RALS group. Also after adjusting for these discrepancies, operative time was similar between S-LPS and RALS. Operative room time was statistically longer in the RALS group compared with that of S-LPS. No statistically significant difference was found concerning other study outcomes. Pain and bowel symptoms improved in both groups at 12-month follow up.

CONCLUSIONS

If performed by expert teams, RALS provides similar perioperative outcomes compared with S-LPS in rectosigmoid endometriosis surgical treatment, except for longer operative room time.

To Robot or Not To Robot: The Use of Robotics in Benign Gynecologic Surgery

The use of robotic-assisted laparoscopic surgery has continued to grow since the Food and Drug Administration approval for robotic-assisted gynecologic surgery in 2005. However, despite this growth in utilization, the data supporting its use in benign gynecologic surgery has not strongly supported its advantages over conventional laparoscopy. Controversy exists between supporters of robotic-assisted laparoscopic surgery and conventional laparoscopy. This article discusses the current literature regarding the use of robotic-assisted surgery in benign gynecologic surgery.

Application of robotic single-site surgery with optional additional port for endometriosis: a single institution's experience

To evaluate the safety and feasibility of treating stage I-IV endometriosis patients with robotic single-site surgery (RSSS). A retrospective chart review was conducted on 334 patients with endometriosis treated by a single surgeon at a university hospital from January 2015 to November 2019. Surgeries were performed in a single institution between 2015 and 2019. All patients presented with pelvic pain and underwent surgical resection of the lesion. American Society of Reproductive Medicine (ASRM) standards were used to classify endometriosis. The primary goal of this study is to investigate the feasibility and safety of RSSS for surgical resection of stage I-IV endometriosis patients. We will compare patient characteristics and surgical parameters, such as blood loss, operating time, and postoperative complications, across different endometriosis stages to evaluate the effectiveness of this novel technique. RSSS was used for all cases, with no conversions to laparotomy or traditional laparoscopy. One to two additional ports were placed in 41 patients with deeply infiltrating endometriosis (DIE) involving the colorectal and urinary tract and/or extensive pelvic adhesions. Across patient groups, there were no significant differences in age, BMI, fertility history, abdominal surgery history, and hysterectomy ratio (P > 0.05). The median operation time was 140.25 min (range: 85.50-260.00 min, P < 0.05) and median blood loss was 31.25 mL (range: 15-100 mL, P < 0.05). Histopathology supported the diagnosis in 259/334 patients. The undiagnosed patients were associated with lower ASRM scores. For 83.3% of patients (295/334), the length of hospital stay was < 24 h. The postoperative complication rate was 6.0% (20/334), although only two cases were severe. Our results indicate that RSSS is an alternative, safe, and acceptable platform for the surgical treatment of all stages of endometriosis.

Endometriosis is a chronic systemic disease: clinical challenges and novel innovations

Endometriosis is a common disease affecting 5-10% of women of reproductive age globally. However, despite its prevalence, diagnosis is typically delayed by years, misdiagnosis is common, and delivery of effective therapy is prolonged. Identification and prompt treatment of endometriosis are essential and facilitated by accurate clinical diagnosis. Endometriosis is classically defined as a chronic, gynaecological disease characterised by endometrial-like tissue present outside of the uterus and is thought to arise by retrograde menstruation. However, this description is outdated and no longer reflects the true scope and manifestations of the disease. The clinical presentation is varied, the presence of pelvic lesions is heterogeneous, and the manifestations of the disease outside of the female reproductive tract remain poorly understood. Endometriosis is now considered a systemic disease rather than a disease predominantly affecting the pelvis. Endometriosis affects metabolism in liver and adipose tissue, leads to systemic inflammation, and alters gene expression in the brain that causes pain sensitisation and mood disorders. The full effect of the disease is not fully recognised and goes far beyond the pelvis. Recognition of the full scope of the disease will facilitate clinical diagnosis and allow for more comprehensive treatment than currently available. Progestins and low-dose oral contraceptives are unsuccessful in a third of symptomatic women globally, probably as a result of progesterone resistance. Oral gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonists constitute an effective and tolerable therapeutic alternative when first-line medications do not work. The development of GnRH antagonists has resulted in oral drugs that have fewer side-effects than other therapies and has allowed for rapid movement between treatments to optimise and personalise endometriosis care. In this Review, we discuss the latest understanding of endometriosis as a systemic disease with multiple manifestations outside the parameters of classic gynaecological disease.

Research quality and transparency, outcome measurement and evidence for safety and effectiveness in robot-assisted surgery: systematic review

BACKGROUND

Robot-assisted surgery (RAS) has potential panspecialty surgical benefits. High-quality evidence for widespread implementation is lacking. This systematic review aimed to assess the RAS evidence base for the quality of randomized evidence on safety and effectiveness, specialty 'clustering', and outcomes for RAS research.

METHODS

A systematic review was undertaken according to PRISMA guidelines. All pathologies and procedures utilizing RAS were included. Studies were limited to RCTs, the English language and publication within the last decade. The main outcomes selected for the review design were safety and efficacy, and study purpose. Secondary outcomes were study characteristics, funding and governance.

RESULTS

Searches identified 7142 titles, from which 183 RCTs were identified for data extraction. The commonest specialty was urology (35·0 per cent). There were just 76 unique study populations, indicating significant overlap of publications; 103 principal studies were assessed further. Only 64·1 per cent of studies reported a primary outcome measure, with 29·1 per cent matching their registration/protocol. Safety was assessed in 68·9 per cent of trials; operative complications were the commonest measure. Forty-eight per cent of trials reported no significant difference in safety between RAS and comparator, and 11 per cent reported RAS to be superior. Efficacy or effectiveness was assessed in 80·6 per cent of trials; 43 per cent of trials showed no difference between RAS and comparator, and 24 per cent reported that RAS was superior. Funding was declared in 47·6 per cent of trials.

CONCLUSION

The evidence base for RAS is of limited quality and variable transparency in reporting. No patterns of harm to patients were identified. RAS has potential to be beneficial, but requires continued high-quality evaluation.

Laparoscopic Treatment of Ureteral Endometriosis: A Systematic Review

OBJECTIVE

To review the literature for the preoperative clinical characteristics, surgical findings, and outcomes of patients who underwent laparoscopic surgical treatment of ureteral endometriosis (UE).

DATA SOURCES

A systematic search was performed in the PubMed and Scopus databases.

METHODS OF STUDY SELECTION

Following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, studies in English language that assessed UE treated surgically by laparoscopy published between 2008 and 2020 were selected.

TABULATION, INTEGRATION, AND RESULTS

In an initial search, 1313 articles were identified, 193 in PubMed and 1120 in Scopus databases. A total of 1291 articles that did not meet eligibility criteria were excluded. The remaining 22 studies were included in the final qualitative analysis, with a total of 1337 patients. Data on preoperative patient's characteristics, preoperative imaging examinations, intraoperative findings, and postoperative complications were abstracted by 1 author. The descriptive nature of included studies prevented the performance of meta-analysis. Preoperative symptoms included dysmenorrhea (76.3%), pelvic pain (59.6%), dyspareunia (46.2%), lower urinary tract symptoms (21.3%), and ureteral obstructive symptoms (9.9%). Intraoperative findings showed that UE lesions were left-sided in 55% of the cases, right-sided in 28.9% of the cases, and bilateral in 8.7% of the cases. Ureterolysis alone or before another technique was performed in 69.1% of the cases, ureteral resection followed by ureteroureteral anastomosis in 6%, ureteroneocystostomy after ureteral resection in 21%, and nephrectomy in 0.45% of the patients. Double-J ureteral stent placement was reported in 33.3% of the cases. Concomitant resection of the bladder owing to endometriosis involvement was performed in 15.5% of the cases. The prevalence of ureteral injury was 3.1%. Postoperative complications included ureteral fistula (2.8%), ureteral stenosis (24.2%), persistence/recurrence of UE (3.8%), and reoperation for fistula and/or stricture treatment (3.9%).

CONCLUSION

UE is associated with common endometriosis pain symptoms and a low rate of lower urinary tract symptoms. The standard surgical technique for UE treatment is not yet a consensus; however, the laparoscopic approach with previous ureterolysis, leaving ureteral resection only for refractory cases, seems to be a safe and effective treatment, with improvement of symptoms and few intraoperative and postoperative complications.

Laparoscopic surgery for endometriosis

BACKGROUND

Endometriosis is associated with pain and infertility. Surgical interventions aim to remove visible areas of endometriosis and restore the anatomy.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness and safety of laparoscopic surgery in the treatment of pain and infertility associated with endometriosis.

SEARCH METHODS

This review has drawn on the search strategy developed by the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group including searching the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group's specialised register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL, reference lists for relevant trials, and trial registries from inception to April 2020.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We selected randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared the effectiveness and safety of laparoscopic surgery with any other laparoscopic or robotic intervention, holistic or medical treatment, or diagnostic laparoscopy only.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently performed selection of studies, assessment of trial quality and extraction of relevant data with disagreements resolved by a third review author. We collected data for the core outcome set for endometriosis. Primary outcomes included overall pain and live birth. We evaluated the quality of evidence using GRADE methods.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 14 RCTs. The studies randomised 1563 women with endometriosis. Four RCTs compared laparoscopic ablation or excision with diagnostic laparoscopy only. Two RCTs compared laparoscopic excision with diagnostic laparoscopy only. One RCT compared laparoscopic ablation or excision with laparoscopic ablation or excision and uterine suspension. Two RCTs compared laparoscopic ablation and uterine nerve transection with diagnostic laparoscopy only. One RCT compared laparoscopic ablation with diagnostic laparoscopy and gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) analogues. Two RCTs compared laparoscopic ablation with laparoscopic excision. One RCT compared laparoscopic ablation or excision with helium thermal coagulator with laparoscopic ablation or excision with electrodiathermy. One RCT compared conservative laparoscopic surgery with laparoscopic colorectal resection of deep endometriosis infiltrating the rectum. Common limitations in the primary studies included lack of clearly described blinding, failure to fully describe methods of randomisation and allocation concealment, and poor reporting of outcome data. Laparoscopic treatment versus diagnostic laparoscopy We are uncertain of the effect of laparoscopic treatment on overall pain scores compared to diagnostic laparoscopy only at six months (mean difference (MD) 0.90, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.31 to 1.49; 1 RCT, 16 participants; very low quality evidence) and at 12 months (MD 1.65, 95% CI 1.11 to 2.19; 1 RCT, 16 participants; very low quality evidence), where a positive value means pain relief (the higher the score, the more pain relief) and a negative value reflects pain increase (the lower the score, the worse the increase in pain). No studies looked at live birth. We are uncertain of the effect of laparoscopic treatment on quality of life compared to diagnostic laparoscopy only: EuroQol-5D index summary at six months (MD 0.03, 95% CI -0.12 to 0.18; 1 RCT, 39 participants; low quality evidence), 12-item Short Form (SF-12) mental health component (MD 2.30, 95% CI -4.50 to 9.10; 1 RCT, 39 participants; low quality evidence) and SF-12 physical health component (MD 2.70, 95% CI -2.90 to 8.30; 1 RCT, 39 participants; low quality evidence). Laparoscopic treatment probably improves viable intrauterine pregnancy rate compared to diagnostic laparoscopy only (odds ratio (OR) 1.89, 95% CI 1.25 to 2.86; 3 RCTs, 528 participants; I² = 0%; moderate quality evidence). We are uncertain of the effect of laparoscopic treatment compared to diagnostic laparoscopy only on ectopic pregnancy (MD 1.18, 95% CI 0.10 to 13.48; 1 RCT, 100 participants; low quality evidence) and miscarriage (MD 0.94, 95% CI 0.35 to 2.54; 2 RCTs, 112 participants; low quality evidence). There was limited reporting of adverse events. No conversions to laparotomy were reported in both groups (1 RCT, 341 participants). Laparoscopic ablation and uterine nerve transection versus diagnostic laparoscopy We are uncertain of the effect of laparoscopic ablation and uterine nerve transection on adverse events (more specifically vascular injury) compared to diagnostic laparoscopy only (OR 0.33, 95% CI 0.01 to 8.32; 1 RCT, 141 participants; low quality evidence). No studies looked at overall pain scores (at six and 12 months), live birth, quality of life, viable intrauterine pregnancy confirmed by ultrasound, ectopic pregnancy and miscarriage. Laparoscopic ablation versus laparoscopic excision There was insufficient evidence to determine whether there was a difference in overall pain, measured at 12 months, for laparoscopic ablation compared with laparoscopic excision (MD 0.00, 95% CI -1.22 to 1.22; 1 RCT, 103 participants; very low quality evidence). No studies looked at overall pain scores at six months, live birth, quality of life, viable intrauterine pregnancy confirmed by ultrasound, ectopic pregnancy, miscarriage and adverse events. Helium thermal coagulator versus electrodiathermy We are uncertain whether helium thermal coagulator compared to electrodiathermy improves quality of life using the 30-item Endometriosis Health Profile (EHP-30) at nine months, when considering the components: pain (MD 6.68, 95% CI -3.07 to 16.43; 1 RCT, 119 participants; very low quality evidence), control and powerlessness (MD 4.79, 95% CI -6.92 to 16.50; 1 RCT, 119 participants; very low quality evidence), emotional well-being (MD 6.17, 95% CI -3.95 to 16.29; 1 RCT, 119 participants; very low quality evidence) and social support (MD 5.62, 95% CI -6.21 to 17.45; 1 RCT, 119 participants; very low quality evidence). Adverse events were not estimable. No studies looked at overall pain scores (at six and 12 months), live birth, viable intrauterine pregnancy confirmed by ultrasound, ectopic pregnancy and miscarriage.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Compared to diagnostic laparoscopy only, it is uncertain whether laparoscopic surgery reduces overall pain associated with minimal to severe endometriosis. No data were reported on live birth. There is moderate quality evidence that laparoscopic surgery increases viable intrauterine pregnancy rates confirmed by ultrasound compared to diagnostic laparoscopy only. No studies were found that looked at live birth for any of the comparisons. Further research is needed considering the management of different subtypes of endometriosis and comparing laparoscopic interventions with lifestyle and medical interventions. There was insufficient evidence on adverse events to allow any conclusions to be drawn regarding safety.