1
|
Russo E, Montt Guevara MM, Sacinti KG, Misasi G, Falcone M, Morganti R, Mereu L, Dalprà F, Tateo S, Simoncini T. Minimal Invasive Abdominal Sacral Colpopexy and Abdominal Lateral Suspension: A Prospective, Open-Label, Multicenter, Non-Inferiority Trial. J Clin Med 2023; 12:jcm12082926. [PMID: 37109262 PMCID: PMC10147058 DOI: 10.3390/jcm12082926] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/16/2023] [Revised: 03/29/2023] [Accepted: 04/13/2023] [Indexed: 04/29/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Abdominal minimally invasive surgery has become increasingly prominent for the treatment of prolapse. Abdominal sacral colpopexy (ASC) is the gold standard for the treatment of advanced apical prolapse; however, alternative surgical approaches such as the abdominal lateral suspension (ALS) have been developed to improve patient outcomes. This study aims to determine whether ALS improves outcomes compared to ASC in multicompartmental prolapse patients. METHODS A prospective, open-label, multicenter, non-inferiority trial was conducted in 360 patients who underwent ASC or ALS for the treatment of apical prolapse. The primary outcome was anatomical and symptomatic cure of the apical compartment at 1-year follow-up; secondary outcomes included prolapse recurrence, re-operation rate, and post-operative complications. A 300-patient cohort was subdivided into 200-patients who underwent ALS and 100-patients who underwent ASC. The confidence interval method was used to calculate the p-value of non-inferiority. RESULTS At the 12-months follow-up, the objective cure rate of the apical defect was 92% for ALS and 94% for ASC (recurrence rates were 8% and 6%, respectively, and the p-value for non-inferiority was <0.01). The mMesh complication rates were 1% and 2% for ALS and ASC, respectively. CONCLUSIONS This study demonstrated that the ALS technique is not inferior to the gold standard ASC for the surgical treatment of apical prolapse.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Eleonora Russo
- Division of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Department of Experimental and Clinical Medicine, University of Pisa, 56126 Pisa, Italy
| | - Maria Magdalena Montt Guevara
- Division of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Department of Experimental and Clinical Medicine, University of Pisa, 56126 Pisa, Italy
| | - Koray Gorkem Sacinti
- Division of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Department of Experimental and Clinical Medicine, University of Pisa, 56126 Pisa, Italy
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Ankara University School of Medicine, 06100 Ankara, Turkey
| | - Giulia Misasi
- Division of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Department of Experimental and Clinical Medicine, University of Pisa, 56126 Pisa, Italy
| | - Maria Falcone
- Division of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Department of Experimental and Clinical Medicine, University of Pisa, 56126 Pisa, Italy
| | - Riccardo Morganti
- SOD Clinical Trial Statistical Support, Azienda Ospedaliero Universitaria Pisana, 56126 Pisa, Italy
| | - Liliana Mereu
- Department of Provincial Health Services, Local Health of Trento, 38123 Trento, Italy
| | - Francesca Dalprà
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Santorso Hospital, 36014 Vicenza, Italy
| | - Saverio Tateo
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Centre Hospitalier de Troyes, 10003 Troyes, France
| | - Tommaso Simoncini
- Division of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Department of Experimental and Clinical Medicine, University of Pisa, 56126 Pisa, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Mothes AR, Kather A, Cepraga I, Esber A, Kwetkat A, Runnebaum IB. Robotic-assisted Gynecological Surgery in Older Patients - a Comparative Cohort Study of Perioperative Outcomes. Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd 2023; 83:437-445. [PMID: 37153652 PMCID: PMC10155232 DOI: 10.1055/a-1902-4577] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/15/2022] [Accepted: 11/28/2022] [Indexed: 05/10/2023] Open
Abstract
Study design Because of current demographic developments, a hypothesis was proposed whereby older female patients aged > 65 years can be safely operated using minimally invasive, robotic-assisted surgery, despite having more preoperative comorbidities. A comparative cohort study was designed to compare the age group ≥ 65 years (older age group, OAG) with the age group < 65 years (younger age group, YAG) after robotic-assisted gynecological surgery (RAS) in two German centers. Patients and methods Consecutive RAS procedures performed between 2016 and 2021 at the Women's University Hospital of Jena and the Robotic Center Eisenach to treat benign or oncological indications were included in the study. The age groups were compared according to their preoperative comorbidities (ASA, Charlson comorbidity index [CCI], cumulative illness rating scale - geriatric version [CIRS-G]) and perioperative parameters such as Clavien-Dindo (CD) classification of surgical complications. Analysis was performed using Welch's t -test, chi 2 test, and Fisher's exact test. Results A total of 242 datasets were identified, of which 63 (73 ± 5 years) were OAG and 179 were YAG (48 ± 10 years). Patient characteristics and the percentage of benign or oncological indications did not differ between the two age groups. Comorbidity scores and the percentage of obese patients were higher in the OAG group: CCI (2.7 ± 2.0 vs. 1.5 ± 1.3; p < 0.001), CIRS-G (9.7 ± 3.9 vs. 5.4 ± 2.9; p < 0.001), ASA class II/III (91.8% vs. 74.1%; p = 0.004), obesity (54.1% vs. 38.2%; p = 0.030). There was no difference between age groups, even grouped for benign or oncological indications, with regard to perioperative parameters such as duration of surgery (p = 0.088; p = 0.368), length of hospital stay (p = 0.786; p = 0.814), decrease in Hb levels (p = 0.811; p = 0.058), conversion rate (p = 1.000; p = 1.000) and CD complications (p = 0.433; p = 0.745). Conclusion Although preoperative comorbidity was higher in the group of older female patients, no differences were found between age groups with regard to perioperative outcomes following robotic-assisted gynecological surgery. Patient age is not a contraindication for robotic gynecological surgery.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Anke R. Mothes
- Klinik für Frauenheilkunde und Robotisches Zentrum, St. Georg Klinikum Eisenach, Akademisches Lehrkrankenhaus des Universitätsklinikums Jena, Eisenach, Germany
| | - Angela Kather
- Klinik und Poliklinik für Frauenheilkunde und Fortpflanzungsmedizin, Universitätsklinikum Jena, Jena, Germany
| | - Irina Cepraga
- Klinik für Frauenheilkunde und Robotisches Zentrum, St. Georg Klinikum Eisenach, Akademisches Lehrkrankenhaus des Universitätsklinikums Jena, Eisenach, Germany
- Klinik und Poliklinik für Frauenheilkunde und Fortpflanzungsmedizin, Universitätsklinikum Jena, Jena, Germany
| | - Anke Esber
- Klinik für Frauenheilkunde und Robotisches Zentrum, St. Georg Klinikum Eisenach, Akademisches Lehrkrankenhaus des Universitätsklinikums Jena, Eisenach, Germany
- Klinik und Poliklinik für Frauenheilkunde und Fortpflanzungsmedizin, Universitätsklinikum Jena, Jena, Germany
| | - Anja Kwetkat
- Klinik für Geriatrie und Palliativmedizin, Klinikum Osnabrück GmbH, Osnabrück, Germany
| | - Ingo B. Runnebaum
- Klinik und Poliklinik für Frauenheilkunde und Fortpflanzungsmedizin, Universitätsklinikum Jena, Jena, Germany
- Correspondence Prof. Dr. Ingo B. Runnebaum, MBA Klinik und Poliklinik für Frauenheilkunde und Fortpflanzungsmedizin,
Universitätsklinikum JenaAm Klinikum 107747
JenaGermany
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Simoncini T, Panattoni A, Aktas M, Ampe J, Betschart C, Bloemendaal ALA, Buse S, Campagna G, Caretto M, Cervigni M, Consten ECJ, Davila HH, Dubuisson J, Espin-Basany E, Fabiani B, Faucheron JL, Giannini A, Gurland B, Hahnloser D, Joukhadar R, Mannella P, Mereu L, Martellucci J, Meurette G, Montt Guevara MM, Ratto C, O'Reilly BA, Reisenauer C, Russo E, Schraffordt Koops S, Siddiqi S, Sturiale A, Naldini G. Robot-assisted pelvic floor reconstructive surgery: an international Delphi study of expert users. Surg Endosc 2023:10.1007/s00464-023-10001-4. [PMID: 36952046 PMCID: PMC10035464 DOI: 10.1007/s00464-023-10001-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/14/2022] [Accepted: 02/25/2023] [Indexed: 03/24/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Robotic surgery has gained popularity for the reconstruction of pelvic floor defects. Nonetheless, there is no evidence that robot-assisted reconstructive surgery is either appropriate or superior to standard laparoscopy for the performance of pelvic floor reconstructive procedures or that it is sustainable. The aim of this project was to address the proper role of robotic pelvic floor reconstructive procedures using expert opinion. METHODS We set up an international, multidisciplinary group of 26 experts to participate in a Delphi process on robotics as applied to pelvic floor reconstructive surgery. The group comprised urogynecologists, urologists, and colorectal surgeons with long-term experience in the performance of pelvic floor reconstructive procedures and with the use of the robot, who were identified primarily based on peer-reviewed publications. Two rounds of the Delphi process were conducted. The first included 63 statements pertaining to surgeons' characteristics, general questions, indications, surgical technique, and future-oriented questions. A second round including 20 statements was used to reassess those statements where borderline agreement was obtained during the first round. The final step consisted of a face-to-face meeting with all participants to present and discuss the results of the analysis. RESULTS The 26 experts agreed that robotics is a suitable indication for pelvic floor reconstructive surgery because of the significant technical advantages that it confers relative to standard laparoscopy. Experts considered these advantages particularly important for the execution of complex reconstructive procedures, although the benefits can be found also during less challenging cases. The experts considered the robot safe and effective for pelvic floor reconstruction and generally thought that the additional costs are offset by the increased surgical efficacy. CONCLUSION Robotics is a suitable choice for pelvic reconstruction, but this Delphi initiative calls for more research to objectively assess the specific settings where robotic surgery would provide the most benefit.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Tommaso Simoncini
- Division of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Department of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy.
| | - Andrea Panattoni
- Division of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Department of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy
| | - Mustafa Aktas
- Division of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Maasstad Hospital, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Jozef Ampe
- Department of Urology, AZ Sint-Jan Bruges Hospitals, Brugge, Belgium
| | - Cornelia Betschart
- Department of Gynecology, University Hospital of Zurich, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
| | | | - Stephan Buse
- Department of Urology and Urologic Oncology, Alfried Krupp Hospital, Essen, Germany
| | - Giuseppe Campagna
- Division of Urogynecology and Pelvic Floor Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Women and Child Health, University Hospital A. Gemelli IRCCS, Catholic University of the Sacred Heart, Rome, Italy
| | - Marta Caretto
- Division of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Department of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy
| | - Mauro Cervigni
- Department of Urology, La Sapienza University-Polo Pontino ICOT, Latina, Italy
| | - Esther C J Consten
- Department of Surgery, Meander Medical Center, Amersfoort and Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - Hugo H Davila
- Cleveland Clinic Indian River Hospital, Florida State University, College of Medicine, Tallahassee, FL, USA
| | - Jean Dubuisson
- Department of Pediatrics, Gynecology, and Obstetrics, Geneva University Hospitals and University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland
| | - Eloy Espin-Basany
- Unidad de Cirugía Colorrectal, Servicio de Cirugía General, Hospital Valle de Hebron, Universitat Autonoma de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Bernardina Fabiani
- Proctology and Pelvic Floor Clinical Center, Cisanello University Hospital, Pisa, Italy
| | - Jean-Luc Faucheron
- Colorectal Surgery Unit, Visceral Surgery and Acute Care Surgery Department, Grenoble Alps University Hospital, Grenoble, France
| | - Andrea Giannini
- Division of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Department of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy
| | - Brooke Gurland
- Division of Colorectal Surgery, Department of Surgery, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, USA
| | - Dieter Hahnloser
- Department of Visceral Surgery, University Hospital Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland
| | - Ralf Joukhadar
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Wuerzburg, Würzburg, Germany
| | - Paolo Mannella
- Division of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Department of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy
| | - Liliana Mereu
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Cannizzaro Hospital, Catania, Italy
| | - Jacopo Martellucci
- Department of General, Emergency and Minimally Invasive Surgery, Careggi University Hospital, Florence, Italy
| | - Guillaume Meurette
- Digestive and Endocrine Surgery Clinic, IMAD, CHU de Nantes, Hôtel Dieu, Nantes Cedex, France
| | - Maria Magdalena Montt Guevara
- Division of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Department of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy
| | - Carlo Ratto
- Proctology Unit, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Agostino Gemelli IRCCS, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Rome, Italy
| | - Barry A O'Reilly
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Cork University Maternity Hospital, Cork, Ireland
| | - Christl Reisenauer
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University Hospital Tuebingen, Tuebingen, Germany
| | - Eleonora Russo
- Division of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Department of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy
| | | | | | - Alessandro Sturiale
- Proctology and Pelvic Floor Clinical Center, Cisanello University Hospital, Pisa, Italy
| | - Gabriele Naldini
- Proctology and Pelvic Floor Clinical Center, Cisanello University Hospital, Pisa, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Padoa A, Shiber Y, Fligelman T, Tomashev R, Tsviban A, Smorgick N. Advanced Cystocele is a Risk Factor for Surgical Failure Following Robotic-Assisted Laparoscopic Sacrocolpopexy. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 2021; 29:409-415. [PMID: 34763064 DOI: 10.1016/j.jmig.2021.11.002] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/27/2021] [Revised: 10/30/2021] [Accepted: 11/02/2021] [Indexed: 11/30/2022]
Abstract
STUDY OBJECTIVE To assess the outcome of robotic-assisted laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy (RALSCP) and to identify risk factors for surgical failure and long term complications in patients at high risk for surgical failure. DESIGN Retrospective cohort study. SETTING A university hospital. PATIENTS Sixty-seven women with pelvic organ prolapse at high risk for surgical failure. INTERVENTIONS RALSCP from November 2012 to July 2020. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS Information was collected from the electronic medical records. Pre-operative and post-operative assessment included a urogynecologic history, prolapse staging, cough stress test, and validated quality of life questionnaires. Anatomical success was defined as POP stage less than 2 at last follow-up. Mean follow-up was 24.6 ± 17.9 months. Sixteen women (23.9%) reported bulge symptoms at the latest follow-up; upon POP-Q staging, surgical failure or recurrence was observed in 35 (52.2%) patients. On multiple logistic regression analysis, a pre-operative POP-Q point Ba measurement ≥ 3 cm beyond the hymen was independently related to surgical failure. Late post-operative complications included three (4.5%) cases of post-operative ventral hernia and five (7.5%) cases of mesh erosion, all in patients operated using Ethibond sutures. CONCLUSIONS Anatomical success of RALSCP in POP patients at high risk for surgical failure is worse than previously reported. Advanced pre-operative anterior vaginal wall prolapse is a risk factor for surgical failure. Delayed absorbable sutures for vaginal mesh fixation seem to be safer than multifilament, permanent sutures, in terms of the risk for mesh erosion.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Anna Padoa
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Shamir Assaf Harofe Medical Center, Tsrifin, Israel; Sackler School of Medicine, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel.
| | - Yair Shiber
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Shamir Assaf Harofe Medical Center, Tsrifin, Israel; Sackler School of Medicine, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel
| | - Tal Fligelman
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Shamir Assaf Harofe Medical Center, Tsrifin, Israel; Sackler School of Medicine, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel
| | - Roni Tomashev
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Shamir Assaf Harofe Medical Center, Tsrifin, Israel; Sackler School of Medicine, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel
| | - Anna Tsviban
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Shamir Assaf Harofe Medical Center, Tsrifin, Israel; Sackler School of Medicine, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel
| | - Noam Smorgick
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Shamir Assaf Harofe Medical Center, Tsrifin, Israel; Sackler School of Medicine, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel
| |
Collapse
|