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.

Obesity and Reproduction

OBJECTIVE

To provide a comprehensive review and evidence-based recommendations for the delivery of fertility care to women with obesity.

OUTCOMES

The impact of obesity on fertility, fertility treatments, and both short and long-term maternal fetal outcomes was carefully considered.

EVIDENCE

Published literature was reviewed through searches of MEDLINE and CINAHL using appropriate vocabulary and key words. Results included systematic reviews, clinical trials, observational studies, clinical practice guidelines, and expert opinions.

VALUES

The Canadian Fertility & Andrology Society (CFAS) is a multidisciplinary, national non-profit society that serves as the voice of reproductive specialists, scientists, and allied health professionals working in the field of assisted reproduction in Canada. The evidence obtained for this guideline was reviewed and evaluated by the Clinical Practice Guideline (CPG) Committee of the CFAS under the leadership of the principal authors.

BENEFITS, HARMS, AND COSTS

The implementation of these recommendations should assist clinicians and other health care providers in counselling and providing reproductive care to women with obesity.

VALIDATION

This guideline and its recommendations have been reviewed and approved by the membership, the CPG Committee and the Board of Directors of the CFAS.

SPONSORS

Canadian Fertility & Andrology Society.

RECOMMENDATIONS

Twenty-one evidence based recommendations are provided. These recommendations specifically evaluate the impact of obesity on natural fertility, fertility treatments, and maternal-fetal outcomes. Strategies to lose weight and BMI cut-offs are also addressed.