Robotic single-site versus multi-port myomectomy: a case-control study

Enhancing surgical performance: the role of robotic surgery in myomectomies, a systematic review and metanalysis

Examine the role, benefits, and limitations of robotic surgery in myomectomies compared to laparoscopic and open surgical approaches. This review sourced data from CENTRAL, Pubmed, Medline, and Embase up until May 1, 2023. Full articles comparing clinical outcomes of robotic myomectomy with open or laparoscopic procedures were included without language restriction. Initially, 2150 records were found. 24 studies were finally included for both qualitative and quantitative analyses. Two investigators independently assessed all reports following PRISMA guidelines. Meta-analysis was conducted using the software "Review Manager Version 5.4". Risk-of-bias was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. Sensitivity analysis was conducted, when feasible. In a comparison between robotic and laparoscopic myomectomies, no significant difference was observed in fibroid weights and the size of the largest fibroid. Robotic myomectomy resulted in less blood loss, but transfusion rates were comparable. Both methods had similar complication rates and operative times, although some robotic studies showed longer durations. Conversion rates favored robotics. Hospital stays varied widely, with no overall significant difference, and pregnancy rates were similar between the two methods. When comparing robotic to open myomectomies, open procedures treated heavier and larger fibroids. They also had greater blood loss, but the robotic approach required fewer transfusions. The complication rate was slightly higher in open procedures. Open surgeries were generally faster, postoperative pain scores were similar, but hospital stays were longer for open procedures. Pregnancy rates were comparable for both robotic and open methods. Robotic surgery offers advancement in myomectomy procedures by offering enhanced exposure and dexterity, leading to reduced blood loss and improved patient outcomes. PROSPERO registration: CRD42023462348.

Comparison of Surgical Outcomes of Two New Techniques Complementing Robotic Single-Site Myomectomy: Coaxial Robotic Single-Site Myomectomy vs. Hybrid Robotic Single-Site Myomectomy

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to compare surgical outcomes between two new robotic single-site myomectomy (RSSM)-complementary techniques: coaxial robotic single-site myomectomy (Coaxial-RSSM) and hybrid robotic single-site myomectomy (Hybrid-RSSM).

METHODS

Medical records for 132 women undergoing Coaxial-RSSM and 150 undergoing Hybrid-RSSM, consecutively, were retrospectively reviewed. Patient characteristics and surgical outcomes were assessed and compared after propensity score matching (PSM).

RESULTS

In the outcomes of PSM, the Coaxial-RSSM group showed significantly reduced blood loss (79.71 vs. 163.75 mL, p < 0.001) and reduced hospital duration (4.18 ± 0.62 vs. 4.63 ± 0.90) relative to the Hybrid-RSSM group. Conversely, Hybrid-RSSM allowed for a shorter operative time compared with Coaxial-RSSM (119.19 vs. 156.01 min, p = 0.007). No conversions to conventional laparoscopy or laparotomy or any need for the multi-site robotic approach occurred in either group. Postoperative complications, including ileus, fever, and wound dehiscence, showed no statistically significant differences between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Blood loss was lower with Coaxial-RSSM, and operative time was shorter for Hybrid-RSSM. A follow-up prospective study is warranted for more comprehensive comparison of surgical outcomes between the two techniques.

Comparison of efficacy of single-port versus conventional laparoscopic treatment for uterine leiomyoma: a latest meta-analysis

Objective

Single-port laparoscopy has been proposed as an ideal surgical method for the treatment of uterine leiomyoma. It can effectively remove the lesion, reduce the loss of hemoglobin, and has superior cosmetic effects. Therefore, we searched relevant studies and conducted a meta-analysis to evaluate the effect of single-port laparoscopy on myoma resection, hemoglobin loss, and scar beauty compared to conventional laparoscopy.

Methods

We systematically searched PubMed, EMBASE, scope, Cochrane, CNKI, and other databases to find randomized controlled studies on the efficacy of single-port laparoscopy and traditional laparoscopy for meta-analysis. The main outcomes of our study were the duration of surgery, the reduction of hemoglobin, and the cosmetic effect of the postoperative scar. The effect model was selected according to heterogeneity (random effect model or fixed effect model), and the relevant sensitivity analysis and publication bias test were performed.

Results

We searched a total of 501 related literature articles and finally included 19 studies involving 21 researchers. Comparison of single-port laparoscopic myomectomy with traditional surgery: Operation time had no significant difference (Standardized Mean Difference [SMD]: 0.13, 95% Confidence interval (CI), -0.04 to 0.30; I²=74%; P = 0.14); The reduction of hemoglobin is lower ([SMD]: -0.04; 95% CI, -0.23 to 0.14; I²=71%; P = 0.65), and the cosmetic effect of postoperative scar is more satisfactory ([SMD]: 0.42, 95% CI: 0.02 to 0.83; I²=72%, P= 0.04). There was no significant difference in conversion rate, postoperative pain, blood loss, postoperative gastrointestinal recovery time, or length of hospital stay.

Conclusion

Compared with traditional laparoscopy, the operation time of the treatment of uterine leiomyoma by single-port laparoscopy is not extended, the reduction of hemoglobin is less, and the cosmetic effect of the scar is better. Therefore, single-port laparoscopy is superior to traditional surgery in the treatment of uterine leiomyoma.

Systematic review registration

https://inplasy.com/inplasy-2023-3-0071/, identifier INPLASY202330071.

Efficacy and safety of robot-assisted laparoscopic myomectomy versus laparoscopic myomectomy: a systematic evaluation and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

Systematic evaluation of the efficacy and safety of robotic-assisted laparoscopic myomectomy (RALM) versus laparoscopic myomectomy (LM).

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, The Cochrane Library, and Web of Science database were searched by computer to seek relevant literature in order to compare the efficacy and safety of RALM with that of LM from the establishment of the databases to January 2023, and Review Manager 5.4 software was utilized to perform a meta-analysis on the literature.

RESULTS

A total of 15 retrospective clinical controlled studies were included. There exists a total of 45,702 patients, among 11,618 patients in the RALM group and the remaining 34,084 patients in the LM group. Meta-analysis results revealed that RALM was associated with lesser intraoperative bleeding (MD =  - 32.03, 95%CI - 57.24 to - 6.83, P = 0.01), lower incidence of blood transfusions (OR = 0.86, 95%CI 0.77 to 0.97, P = 0.01), shorter postoperative hospital stay (MD =  - 0.11, 95%CI - 0.21 to - 0.01, P = 0.03), fewer transitions to open stomach (OR = 0.82, 95%CI 0.73 to 0.92, P = 0.0006), and lower incidence of postoperative complications (OR = 0.58, 95%CI 0.40 to 0.86, P = 0.006) than LM, whereas LM is more advantageous in terms of operative time (MD = 38.61, 95%CI 19.36 to 57.86, P < 0.0001). There was no statistical difference between the two surgical methods in terms of maximum myoma diameter (MD = 0.26, 95%CI - 0.17 to 0.70, P = 0.24).

CONCLUSION

In the aspects of intraoperative bleeding, lower incidence of blood transfusions, postoperative hospital stay, transit open stomach rate, and postoperative complications, RALM has a unique advantage than that of LM, while LM has advantages over RALM in terms of operative time.

Multi-Port Robotic-Assisted Laparoscopic Myomectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Comparative Clinical and Fertility Outcomes

BACKGROUND

Uterine fibroids are the most frequently diagnosed gynaecological tumours, and they often require surgical treatment (conventional laparoscopic myomectomy-CLM). The introduction and evolution of robotic-assisted laparoscopic myomectomy (RALM) in the early 2000s has expanded the range of minimally invasive options for the majority of cases. This study aims to compare RALM with CLM and abdominal myomectomy (AM).

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Fifty-three eligible studies adhered to the pre-established inclusion criteria and were subsequently evaluated for risk of bias and statistical heterogeneity.

RESULTS

The available comparative studies were compared using surgical outcomes, namely blood loss, complication rate, transfusion rate, operation duration, conversion to laparotomy, and length of hospitalisation. RALM was significantly superior to AM in all assessed parameters other than operation duration. RALM and CLM performed similarly in most parameters; however, RALM was associated with reduced intra-operative bleeding in patients with small fibroids and had lower rates of conversion to laparotomy, proving RALM as a safer overall approach.

CONCLUSION

The robotic approach for surgical treatment of uterine fibroids is a safe, effective, and viable approach, which is constantly being improved and may soon acquire widespread adoption and prove to be superior to CLM in certain patient subgroups.

A systematic review and meta-analysis comparing robotic single-site versus multi-port myomectomy

The objective of this study was to compare the surgical outcomes of robotic multi-site myomectomy (RMSM) with those of robotic single-site myomectomy (RSSM). We conducted a systematic search of the PubMed, CINAHL, Scopus, and Google Scholar databases for articles comparing RMSM and RSSM until March 2023. Data analysis was performed using Review Manager V5.3 (Cochrane), and the main outcomes examined were perioperative outcomes and complications. A total of five studies, covering 823 patients, were included in the analysis. The statistical analysis revealed no significant differences between RMSM and RSSM with regard to docking time (p = 0.9), console time (p = 0.37), estimated blood loss (p = 0.38), postoperative hemoglobin (Hb) loss (p = 0.61), transfusion rate (p = 0.25), length of stay (p = 0.08), conversion (p = 0.36), postoperative fever (p = 0.46), intraoperative complication (p = 0.23), or postoperative complication (p = 0.12). However, compared to RMSM, RSSM was found to have a shorter morcellation time (weighted mean difference [WMD] - 4.52 min; 95% confidence interval [CI] - 6.89 to 2.15; p = 0.0002), less total operative time (WMD - 9.83 min; 95% CI - 18.27 to - 1.38; p = 0.02), lower Hb change (WMD - 0.28 g/dL; 95% CI - 0.49 to - 0.07; p = 0.008), and fewer overall complications (odds ratio [OR] 0.55; 95% CI 0.32-0.92; p = 0.02). Our findings suggest that RSSM is a safe and effective alternative to RMSM for the most studied outcomes. Further randomized studies are necessary to validate these results.

Comparison of Multi- and Single-Site Robotic Myomectomy Using the Da Vinci® SP Surgical System: A Propensity Score Matching Analysis

Objective: This study aimed to compare the surgical outcomes between robotic multi-site myomectomy (RMSM) and robotic single-site myomectomy (RSSM), using the da Vinci® SP surgical system and perform propensity score matching analysis to ensure inter-group comparability. Methods: This retrospective study included 105 patients who underwent either three-incision RMSM or RSSM using the da Vinci® SP surgical system. We retrospectively reviewed and compared surgical outcomes using 1:1 propensity score matching. Results: After 1:1 propensity score matching, there were no differences in the total operation time and estimated blood loss between the groups. The docking time (p < 0.0001) and duration of hospital stay (p = 0.0001) were significantly shorter in the RSSM group than in the RMSM group. Conclusions: The surgical outcomes of RSSM were comparable to those of RMSM. Moreover, compared to RMSM, RSSM using the da Vinci® SP surgical system has shorter docking and morcellation times, and duration of hospital stay.

Learning Curve Analysis of Single-Site Robot-Assisted Hysterectomy

We aim to analyze the surgical outcomes and learning curve of single-site robot-assisted hysterectomy. This was a retrospective cohort study from a single academic medical center. A total of 123 patients who underwent single-site robotic surgery for gynecologic disease were enrolled. Gynecologic surgeries were performed by a single surgeon using single-site robot-assisted hysterectomy. The median age of enrolled patients was 49 years (range: 30–74 years). The median operation time was 131 min (range: 59–502 min) and the median docking time was 3 min (range: 1–10 min). In addition, the median console time was 76 min (range: 29–465 min). The cumulative sum (CUSUM) graph for total operation time indicated an initial decrease at case 41, generating 3 distinct performance phases: learning (n = 41 initial cases), competence (n = 54 middle cases), and mastery (n = 28 final cases). There was one case conversion to open surgery due to the difficulty in securing the field of view because of a 16-cm bulky mass protruding from the left pelvic wall. No patients required a transfusion and two complications including vaginal cuff dehiscence were identified. The single-site robot-assisted hysterectomy is a safe and feasible procedure. The learning curve consisted of 41 cases to significantly decrease the total operation time.