Perioperative surgical outcome of conventional and robot-assisted total laparoscopic hysterectomy.

Q2 Medicine Gynecological Surgery Pub Date : 2017-01-01 Epub Date: 2017-04-25 DOI:10.1186/s10397-017-1008-2

W J van Weelden, B B M Gordon, E A Roovers, A A Kraayenbrink, C I M Aalders, F Hartog, F P H L J Dijkhuizen

{"title":"Perioperative surgical outcome of conventional and robot-assisted total laparoscopic hysterectomy.","authors":"W J van Weelden, B B M Gordon, E A Roovers, A A Kraayenbrink, C I M Aalders, F Hartog, F P H L J Dijkhuizen","doi":"10.1186/s10397-017-1008-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: To evaluate surgical outcome in a consecutive series of patients with conventional and robot assisted total laparoscopic hysterectomy.Methods: A retrospective cohort study was performed among patients with benign and malignant indications for a laparoscopic hysterectomy. Main surgical outcomes were operation room time and skin to skin operating time, complications, conversions, rehospitalisation and reoperation, estimated blood loss and length of hospital stay.Results: A total of 294 patients were evaluated: 123 in the conventional total laparoscopic hysterectomy (TLH) group and 171 in the robot TLH group. After correction for differences in basic demographics with a multivariate linear regression analysis, the skin to skin operating time was a significant 18 minutes shorter in robot assisted TLH compared to conventional TLH (robot assisted TLH 92m, conventional TLH 110m, p0.001). The presence or absence of previous abdominal surgery had a significant influence on the skin to skin operating time as did the body mass index and the weight of the uterus. Complications were not significantly different. The robot TLH group had significantly less blood loss and lower rehospitalisation and reoperation rates.Conclusions: This study compares conventional TLH with robot assisted TLH and shows shorter operating times, less blood loss and lower rehospitalisation and reoperation rates in the robot TLH group.","PeriodicalId":46311,"journal":{"name":"Gynecological Surgery","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5440536/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Gynecological Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s10397-017-1008-2","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2017/4/25 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: To evaluate surgical outcome in a consecutive series of patients with conventional and robot assisted total laparoscopic hysterectomy.

Methods: A retrospective cohort study was performed among patients with benign and malignant indications for a laparoscopic hysterectomy. Main surgical outcomes were operation room time and skin to skin operating time, complications, conversions, rehospitalisation and reoperation, estimated blood loss and length of hospital stay.

Results: A total of 294 patients were evaluated: 123 in the conventional total laparoscopic hysterectomy (TLH) group and 171 in the robot TLH group. After correction for differences in basic demographics with a multivariate linear regression analysis, the skin to skin operating time was a significant 18 minutes shorter in robot assisted TLH compared to conventional TLH (robot assisted TLH 92m, conventional TLH 110m, p0.001). The presence or absence of previous abdominal surgery had a significant influence on the skin to skin operating time as did the body mass index and the weight of the uterus. Complications were not significantly different. The robot TLH group had significantly less blood loss and lower rehospitalisation and reoperation rates.

Conclusions: This study compares conventional TLH with robot assisted TLH and shows shorter operating times, less blood loss and lower rehospitalisation and reoperation rates in the robot TLH group.

查看原文

微信好友朋友圈 QQ好友复制链接

本刊更多论文

传统和机器人辅助全腹腔镜子宫切除术的围手术期手术效果。

背景：评估传统和机器人辅助全腹腔镜子宫切除术患者的手术效果：评估一系列连续接受传统和机器人辅助全腹腔镜子宫切除术患者的手术效果：对有良性和恶性指征的腹腔镜子宫切除术患者进行了一项回顾性队列研究。主要手术结果包括手术室时间、皮肤到皮肤的手术时间、并发症、转归、再次住院和再次手术、估计失血量和住院时间：结果：共对 294 名患者进行了评估：结果：共对294名患者进行了评估：传统全腹腔镜子宫切除术（TLH）组123人，机器人TLH组171人。通过多变量线性回归分析对基本人口统计学差异进行校正后，机器人辅助全腹腔镜子宫切除术与传统全腹腔镜子宫切除术相比，皮肤到皮肤的手术时间显著缩短了18分钟（机器人辅助全腹腔镜子宫切除术92米，传统全腹腔镜子宫切除术110米，P0.001）。既往是否进行过腹部手术与体重指数和子宫重量一样，对从皮肤到皮肤的手术时间有显著影响。并发症无明显差异。机器人TLH组的失血量明显更少，再住院率和再手术率更低：这项研究对传统TLH和机器人辅助TLH进行了比较，结果显示机器人TLH组的手术时间更短、失血量更少、再住院率和再手术率更低。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文去求助

来源期刊

Gynecological Surgery SURGERY-

自引率

0.00%

发文量

期刊介绍： "Gynecological Surgery", founded in 2004, is the first and premier peer-reviewed scientific journal dedicated to all aspects of research, development, and training in gynecological surgery. This field is rapidly changing in response to new developments and innovations in endoscopy, robotics, imaging and other interventional procedures. Gynecological surgery is also expanding and now encompasses all surgical interventions pertaining to women health, including oncology, urogynecology and fetal surgery. The Journal publishes Original Research, Reviews, Evidence-based Viewpoints on clinical protocols and procedures, Editorials, Perspectives, Communications and Case Reports.