Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2009 Aug;114(2 Pt 1):231-235.
doi: 10.1097/AOG.0b013e3181af36e3.

Incidence and characteristics of patients with vaginal cuff dehiscence after robotic procedures

Rosanne M Kho  1 , Mohamed N Akl, Jeffrey L Cornella, Paul M Magtibay, Mary Ellen Wechter, Javier F Magrina
Affiliations

Incidence and characteristics of patients with vaginal cuff dehiscence after robotic procedures

Rosanne M Kho et al. Obstet Gynecol. 2009 Aug.

Abstract

Objective: To estimate the incidence and characteristics of patients with vaginal cuff dehiscence after robotic cuff closure.

Methods: We reviewed medical records from March 2004 to December 2008 of all patients with vaginal cuff dehiscence after a robotic simple and radical hysterectomy, trachelectomy, and upper vaginectomy using the robotic da Vinci Surgical System.

Results: Twenty-one of 510 patients were identified with vaginal cuff dehiscence (incidence 4.1%, 95% confidence interval 2.3-5.8%). In nine patients, the robotic procedure was performed for a gynecologic malignancy. Coitus was the triggering event in 10 patients. Patients most commonly presented with vaginal bleeding and sudden gush of watery vaginal discharge. Bowel evisceration was associated in six patients. Median time to presentation was 43 days or 6.1 weeks. Nineteen cases were repaired through a vaginal approach and one combined vaginal and laparoscopic. Three of 21 patients experienced a repeat dehiscence and required a second repair.

Conclusion: Vaginal cuff dehiscence should be considered in patients with vaginal bleeding and sudden watery discharge after robotic cuff closure. The incidence is similar as previously reported for laparoscopic procedures. Contributing factors remain unknown but thermal effect and vaginal closure technique probably play major roles.

Level of evidence: III.

PubMed Disclaimer

Comment in

References

    1. Falcone T, Goldberg JM, Margossian H, Stevens L. Robotically-assisted laparoscopic microsurgical anastomosis: a human pilot study. Fertil Steril 2000;73:1040–2.
    1. Advincula A, Xu X, Goudeau S 4th, Ransom SB. Robot-assisted laparoscopic myomectomy versus abdominal myomectomy: a comparison of short-term surgical outcomes and immediate costs. J Min Inv Gyn 2007;14:698–705.
    1. Kho RM, Hilger WS, Hentz J, Magtibay PM, Magrina JF. Robotic hysterectomy: technique and initial outcomes. Am J Ob Gyn 2007;197:113e1–e4.
    1. Bell MC, Torgerson J, Seshadri-Kreaden U, Suttle AW, Hunt S. Comparison of outcomes and cost for endometrial cancer staging via traditional laparotomy, standard laparoscopy and robotic techniques. Gynecol Oncol 2008;111:407–11.
    1. Magrina JF, Kho RM, Weaver AL, Montero RP, Magtibay PM. Robotic radical hysterectomy: comparison with laparoscopy and laparotomy. Gynecol Oncol 2008;109:86–91.