Senhance Robotic Platform System for Gynecological Surgery
- PMID: 33880002
- PMCID: PMC8035830
- DOI: 10.4293/JSLS.2020.00075
Senhance Robotic Platform System for Gynecological Surgery
Abstract
Background and objectives: Laparoscopic hysterectomy provides patients and surgeons with benefits of less pain, quicker recovery, and better scar cosmesis. Previously, robotic surgical hysterectomy was reserved for patients with complicated disease issues. The objective of this case series was evaluating a new robotic surgical platform, Senhance Surgical System, as a surgical tool in common gynecological procedures.
Methods: The clinic routinely collects surgical and outcome data for all patients and procedures. Data on robotic surgery in hysterectomy, salpingectomy, endometriosis excision, and lysis of adhesions was evaluated.
Results: Fifteen consecutive patients that underwent gynecological surgery using the Senhance System were assessed. Average age was 47.27 years (31 - 63 years). Ten procedures were robotic total laparoscopic hysterectomy and 14 of 15 procedures had at least one salpingectomy. Average blood loss was 52.7 mL (10 - 100 mL). Pain scores at discharge averaged 1.42 and 2.73 at two weeks post-surgery. Minimal pain medication was used. Patient satisfaction with the surgery was 98% and satisfaction with scarring was 100%. Return to normal activities and to work averaged 7.93 and 11.1 days respectively. The haptic feedback and the platform visualization of the procedure was useful. The system provided more surgeon control over both camera and tools compared to previously used robotic systems and traditional laparoscopic surgery.
Conclusion: This initial experience with Senhance Surgical System provided a stable, precise surgical technique with enhanced visualization within the confined space of the abdomen during gynecological surgery. The initial results suggest high patient satisfaction with gynecological surgery and resulting scars. Further study is needed to validate the findings.
Keywords: Gynecology; Hysterectomy; Laparoscopy; Mini-laparoscopy; Robotic surgery.
© 2021 by SLS, Society of Laparoscopic & Robotic Surgeons.
Conflict of interest statement
Conflict of Interest: none
Figures
References
-
- Ramdhan RC, Loukas M, Tubbs RS. Anatomical complications of hysterectomy: a review. Clin Anat. 2017;30(7):946–952. - PubMed
-
- Dedden SJ, Geomini PMAJ, Huirne JAF, Bongers MY. Vaginal and laparoscopic hysterectomy as an outpatient procedure: a systematic review. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2017;216:212–223. - PubMed
-
- Sandberg EM, Twijnstra ARH, Driessen SRC, Jansen FW. Total laparoscopic hysterectomy versus vaginal hysterectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2017;24(2):206–217. - PubMed
-
- Moon AS, Garofalo J, Koirala P, Vu MT, Chuang L. Robotic surgery in gynecology. Surg Clin North Am. 2020;100(2):445–460. - PubMed
-
- Driessen SR, Baden NL, van Zwet EW, Twijnstra AR, Jansen FW. Trends in the implementation of advanced minimally invasive gynecologic surgical procedures in the Netherlands. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2015;22(4):642–647. - PubMed
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Medical