Evaluation of the introduction of robotic technology on route of hysterectomy and complications in the first year of use
- PMID: 21055514
- DOI: 10.1016/j.ajog.2010.07.022
Evaluation of the introduction of robotic technology on route of hysterectomy and complications in the first year of use
Abstract
Objective: We sought to determine the differential rates and complications of hysterectomy type in the year prior to and following the introduction of robotic technology.
Study design: This was a retrospective chart review of 461 hysterectomies performed from July 2007 through June 2008 (period 1) and July 2008 through June 2009 (period 2) at Virginia Commonwealth University Medical Center.
Results: In all, 199 vs 262 hysterectomies were performed in periods 1 and 2: open, 52.3% vs 43.1%; laparoscopic, 18.1% vs 8.0%; robotic, 2.5% vs 24.8%; and vaginal, 27.4% vs 24.1%, respectively. The increase in robotic hysterectomies in period 2 was associated only with a decline in laparoscopic hysterectomy (P < .0001). Major morbidity by route was 23.04% open, 11/1% vaginal, 7.02% laparoscopic, and 4.29% robotic (P < .0001).
Conclusion: Route of hysterectomy changed significantly after the introduction of robotic technology primarily due to a change in management of pelvic organ prolapse. Open hysterectomy was associated with significantly higher complication rates.
Copyright © 2010. Published by Mosby, Inc.
Similar articles
-
Robotic radical hysterectomy: comparison with laparoscopy and laparotomy.Gynecol Oncol. 2008 Apr;109(1):86-91. doi: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2008.01.011. Epub 2008 Feb 14. Gynecol Oncol. 2008. PMID: 18279944
-
Robotic radical hysterectomy with pelvic lymphadenectomy: our early experience.Chirurgia (Bucur). 2009 Jul-Aug;104(4):393-7. Chirurgia (Bucur). 2009. PMID: 19886045
-
Robotic radical hysterectomy in the management of gynecologic malignancies.J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2008 Nov-Dec;15(6):673-6. doi: 10.1016/j.jmig.2008.07.019. Epub 2008 Sep 6. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2008. PMID: 18774759
-
[Laparoscopic hysterectomy. A series of 318 consecutive cases].J Gynecol Obstet Biol Reprod (Paris). 1996;25(4):340-52. J Gynecol Obstet Biol Reprod (Paris). 1996. PMID: 8815132 Review. French.
-
Robotic radical hysterectomy. A literature review.Minerva Ginecol. 2009 Aug;61(4):339-46. Minerva Ginecol. 2009. PMID: 19745798 Review.
Cited by
-
An analysis of the impact of previous laparoscopic hysterectomy experience on the learning curve for robotic hysterectomy.J Robot Surg. 2013 Sep;7(3):295-9. doi: 10.1007/s11701-012-0388-6. Epub 2013 Feb 27. J Robot Surg. 2013. PMID: 27000926
-
Implementation of robotic gynecological surgery in a German University Hospital: patient safety after 110 procedures.Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2020 Dec;302(6):1381-1388. doi: 10.1007/s00404-020-05751-8. Epub 2020 Aug 25. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2020. PMID: 32844240 Free PMC article.
-
Review of Robotic Surgery in Gynecology-The Future Is Here.Rambam Maimonides Med J. 2017 Apr 28;8(2):e0019. doi: 10.5041/RMMJ.10296. Rambam Maimonides Med J. 2017. PMID: 28467761 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Analysis of postoperative pain in robotic versus traditional laparoscopic hysterectomy.J Robot Surg. 2014 Mar;8(1):35-41. doi: 10.1007/s11701-013-0418-z. Epub 2013 Jul 3. J Robot Surg. 2014. PMID: 27637237
-
Direct cost of hysterectomy: comparison of robotic versus other routes.J Robot Surg. 2020 Apr;14(2):305-310. doi: 10.1007/s11701-019-00982-7. Epub 2019 Jun 5. J Robot Surg. 2020. PMID: 31165995
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical