Robotic pelvic organ prolapse surgery

The effect of concomitant hysterectomy on complications following pelvic organ prolapse surgery

PURPOSE

Pelvic organ prolapse (POP) surgery is performed with and without concomitant hysterectomy depending on a variety of factors. The objective was to compare 30-day major complications following POP surgery with and without concomitant hysterectomy.

METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort study using the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) multicenter database to compare 30-day complications using Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes for POP with or without concomitant hysterectomy. Patients were grouped by procedure: Vaginal prolapse repair (VAGINAL), minimally invasive sacrocolpopexy (MISC), and open abdominal sacrocolpopexy (OASC). 30-day postoperative complications and other relevant data were evaluated in patients who underwent concomitant hysterectomy compared to those who did not. Multivariable logistic regression models assessed the association of concomitant hysterectomy on 30-day major complications stratified by surgical approach.

RESULTS

60,201 women undergoing POP surgery comprised our cohort. Within 30 days of surgery, there were 1722 major complications in 1432 patients (2.4%). Prolapse surgery alone had a significantly lower overall complication rate than with concomitant hysterectomy (1.95% vs 2.81%; p < .001). Multivariable analysis revealed odds of complications following POP surgery was higher among women who underwent concomitant hysterectomy compared to those who did not have hysterectomy in VAGINAL (OR 1.53, 95% CI 1.36-1.72), OASC (OR 2.70, 95% CI 1.69-4.33), and overall (OR 1.46, 95% CI 1.31-1.62), but not in MISC (OR 0.99, 95% CI 0.67-1.46.) CONCLUSION: Concomitant hysterectomy at the time of pelvic organ prolapse (POP) surgery increases the risk of 30-day postoperative complications in comparison to prolapse surgery alone in our overall cohort.

Chronic Pelvic Pain, Quality of Life, and Patient Satisfaction After Robotic Sacrocolpopexy for Pelvic Organ Prolapse

Background and objective

When evaluating repair outcomes in robotic sacrocolpopexy (RSC) for the treatment of pelvic organ prolapse (POP), it has become evident that surgeons usually focus on anatomical improvements and neglect equally important parameters of patient satisfaction and quality of life (QoL). Investigating these factors would aid in achieving a more patient-centered approach to treatment. This study aimed to examine QoL and satisfaction outcomes in women after RSC.

Methods

This study analyzed self-reported patient data regarding RSC for POP performed between October 2009 and February 2017 by fellowship-trained urologists in female pelvic medicine and reconstructive surgery. These patients participated in a survey to assess overall satisfaction and QoL, as well as contributing factors, such as changes in bladder and bowel function, vaginal bulge, and vaginal pain on a 7-point Likert scale (ranging from markedly worse to markedly improved). Data were examined using multivariate regression analysis. Positive treatment response was defined as scores of 6 or 7, whereas negative response was defined as scores of 1 to 5.

Results

The response rate was 41% (156/380), and the median age of the participants was 70 years [interquartile range (IQR): 63, 73]. Of note, 98.7% were Caucasian, with 73% currently in a significant relationship. The median duration since RSC was 2.12 years (IQR: 1.2, 3.7). Overall, 93 (66.9%), patients (23.0%), and 123 patients (88.5%) had a positive treatment response for bladder function, bowel function, and vaginal bulge, respectively. Furthermore, 66% of women had improved QoL, 84% reported improved overall satisfaction, and 91.4% stated that they would recommend RSC to a friend. After controlling for significant covariates, results of a multivariate analysis demonstrated positive treatment response for bladder function [odds ratio (OR): 14.6; p < 0.0001], bowel function (OR: 9.72; p = 0.003), and vaginal bulge (OR: 41.7; p < 0.0001), significantly associated with increased odds of having improved QoL, whereas positive treatment response for vaginal bulge (OR: 26.9; p = 0.023) and recommending RSC to a friend (OR: 175; p = 0.0009) were associated with positive overall satisfaction.

Conclusions

Our findings endorse using RSC surgery for patients with POP based on both QoL improvement and overall post-procedure satisfaction perspective. This study may help encourage surgeons and clinicians to employ a surgical modality that incorporates each patient’s unique treatment desires and goals and provide patients with realistic post-procedure goals and expectations regarding treatment.

The grand challenges of Science Robotics

One of the ambitions of Science Robotics is to deeply root robotics research in science while developing novel robotic platforms that will enable new scientific discoveries. Of our 10 grand challenges, the first 7 represent underpinning technologies that have a wider impact on all application areas of robotics. For the next two challenges, we have included social robotics and medical robotics as application-specific areas of development to highlight the substantial societal and health impacts that they will bring. Finally, the last challenge is related to responsible innovation and how ethics and security should be carefully considered as we develop the technology further.

Regenerative robotics

Congenital diseases requiring reconstruction of parts of the gastrointestinal tract, skin, or bone are a challenge to alleviate especially in rapidly growing children. Novel technologies may be the answer. This article presents the state-of-art in regenerative robotic technologies, which are technologies that assist tissues and organs to regenerate using sensing and mechanotherapeutical capabilities. It addresses the challenges in the development of such technologies, among which are autonomy and fault-tolerance for long-term therapy as well as morphological conformations and compliance of such devices to adapt to gradual changes of the tissues in vivo. The potential as medical devices for delivering therapies for tissue growth and as tools for scientific exploration of regenerative mechanisms is also discussed.

Role of robotic surgery on pelvic floor reconstruction

Over the past two decades, minimally invasive surgery (MIS) abdominal surgery has increasingly been used to treat pelvic organ prolapse. Besides the several advantages associated with minimal invasiveness, this approach bridged the gap between the benefits of vaginal surgery and the surgical success rates of open abdominal procedures. The most commonly performed procedure for suspension of the vaginal apex for postoperative vaginal prolapse by robotic-assisted laparoscopy is the sacrocolpopexy. Conventional laparoscopic application of this procedure was first reported in 1994 by Nezhat et al. and had not gained widespread adoption due to lengthy learning curve associated with laparoscopic suturing. Since FDA approval of the da Vinci® robot for gynecologic surgery in 2005, minimally invasive abdominal surgery for pelvic organ prolapse has become increasingly popular, as robotic-assisted laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy is an option for those surgeons without experience or training in the conventional route. Robotic surgery has made its way into the armamentarium of POP treatment and has allowed pelvic surgeons to adapt the "gold standard" technique of abdominal sacrocolpopexy to a minimally invasive approach with improved intraoperative morbidity and decreased convalescence. In fact, repair of pelvic organ prolapse can be performed robotically, and sometimes surgeons can feel suturing and dissection during the procedures less challenging with the assistance of the robot. However, even if robotic surgery may confer many benefits over conventional laparoscopy, these advantages should continue to be weighed against the cost of the technology. To date, as long-term outcomes, evidence about robotic sacrocolpopexy for a repair of pelvic organ prolapse are not conclusive, and much more investigations are needed to evaluate subjective and objective outcomes, perioperative and postoperative adverse events, and costs associated with these procedures. It is plausible to think that the main advantage is that robotics may lead to a widespread adoption of minimally invasive techniques in the field of pelvic floor reconstructive surgery. The following review will address the development and current state of robotic assistance in treating pelvic floor reconstruction discussing available data about the techniques of robotic prolapse repair as well as morbidity, costs and clinical outcomes.

Surgical options for full-thickness rectal prolapse: current status and institutional choice

Full-thickness rectal prolapse (FTRP) is generally believed to result from a sliding hernia through a pelvic fascial defect, or from rectal intussusception. The currently accepted cause is a pelvic floor disorder. Surgery is the only definitive treatment, although the ideal therapeutic option for FTRP has not been determined. Auffret reported the first FTRP surgery using a perineal approach in 1882, and rectopexy using conventional laparotomy was first described by Sudeck in 1922. Laparoscopy was first used by Bermann in 1992, and laparoscopic surgery is now used worldwide; robotic surgery was first described by Munz in 2004. Postoperative morbidity, mortality, and recurrence rates with FTRP surgery are an active research area and in this article we review previously documented surgeries and discuss the best approach for FTRP. We also introduce our institution's laparoscopic surgical technique for FTRP (laparoscopic rectopexy with posterior wrap and peritoneal closure). Therapeutic decisions must be individualized to each patient, while the surgeon's experience must also be considered.

The impact of fellowship surgical training on operative time and patient morbidity during robotics-assisted sacrocolpopexy

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS

Abdominal sacrocolpopexy is commonly performed for the surgical correction of pelvic organ prolapse (POP) in the USA. Over the last decade, fellowship programs have increased the number of these procedures performed robotically. Currently, there is a paucity of literature exploring the impact of fellowship training on outcomes of robotic-assisted sacrocolpopexy (RASC). We sought to explore the impact of an expert surgeon operating alone versus with a fellow on operative time and perioperative morbidity associated with RASC.

METHODS

This is an analysis of a retrospectively collected cohort of all RASCs performed to treat POP from June 2010 to August 2015 by a single attending surgeon. Outcomes were compared by expert surgeon alone and with a fellow.

RESULTS

We identified 208 RASCs, of which 124 (59.6%) were performed by an expert surgeon alone and 84 (40.4%) with a fellow. Eight fellows were included, with a median of 7 cases (interquartile range 5-13.5). Cases with fellows were 31.1 min longer than an expert surgeon alone (155.6 vs 124.5 min, p < 0.001), a 25% increase. Increased operative time for fellows remained significant on multivariate regression (34.2 min, p < 0.001) after adjusting for case order postmenopausal status, hysterectomy, mid-urethral sling, and bowel injury. Years in fellowship did not have an impact on operative time (p = 0.80). Complications were seen in 34 women (16.4%). On univariate regression, fellows did not have an impact on complications (OR 1.49, 95% CI [0.65-3.43]), which was unchanged on multivariate regression (OR 0.628, 95% CI [0.26-1.54]). Prolapse recurrence was seen in 19 women (9.5%). Fellows had no impact on prolapse recurrence (OR 0.478, 95% CI [0.17-1.38]), which was unchanged on multivariate regression (OR 0.266, 95% CI [0.17-1.49]).

CONCLUSION

When an expert surgeon operated together with a fellow, operative time increased by 34 min without increasing prolapse recurrence or complications.

Surgical Outcomes and Safety of Robotic Sacrocolpopexy in Women With Apical Pelvic Organ Prolapse

Purpose

This study aimed to investigate the surgical outcomes and safety of robotic sacrocolpopexy (RSC) in patients with uterine/vaginal vault prolapse.

Methods

Between January 2009 and June 2015, 16 women with apical prolapse underwent RSC. Pelvic organ prolapse quantification (POP-Q) examination was performed, and treatment success was defined as the presence of grade 0 or I apical prolapse upon POP-Q examination at the final follow-up. Pelvic floor distress inventory-short form 20 (PFDI-SF 20) was administered at every follow-up. A treatment satisfaction questionnaire was administered by telephone to evaluate patient satisfaction with the operation.

Results

Median age was 65 years (interquartile range [IQR], 56–68 years), and follow-up duration was 25.3 months (IQR, 5.4–34.0 months). Thirteen women (81.3%) had ≥grade III apical prolapse. Operation time was 251 minutes (IQR, 236–288 minutes), and blood loss was 75 mL (IQR, 50–150 mL). Median hospital stay was 4 days (IQR, 3–5 days). At the final follow-up, treatment success was reported in all patients, who presented grade 0 (n=8, 57.1%) and grade I (n=6, 42.9%) apical prolapse. Dramatic improvements in PFDI-SF 20 scores were noted after RSC (from 39 to 4; P=0.001). Most patients (12 of 13) were satisfied with RSC. An intraoperative complication (sacral venous plexus injury) was reported in 1 patient, and there was no conversion to open surgery. Mesh erosion was not reported.

Conclusions

RSC is an efficient and safe surgical option for apical prolapse repair. Most patients were satisfied with RSC. Thus, RSC might be one of the best treatment options for apical prolapse in women.

Transient Left-Sided Paralysis following Robotic-Assisted Laparoscopic Uteropexy

We describe a case report of a 47-year-old ASA 2 female patient who exhibits severe headache and hemineurology during awakening following robotic pelvic prolapse surgery. The symptoms resolved spontaneously during the first postoperative day. We could not find any explicit root cause. Robotic surgery associated adverse events are discussed.