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
. 2025 Mar 12;17(3):e80497.
doi: 10.7759/cureus.80497. eCollection 2025 Mar.

Comparison of Laparoscopic and Robotic Intraoperative Adverse Events in Benign Gynecological Procedures and the Correlation of the Adverse Events With Postoperative Outcomes and Risk Analysis

Affiliations

Comparison of Laparoscopic and Robotic Intraoperative Adverse Events in Benign Gynecological Procedures and the Correlation of the Adverse Events With Postoperative Outcomes and Risk Analysis

Rooma Sinha et al. Cureus. .

Abstract

Introduction Intraoperative adverse events (iAEs) are a part of any gynecological surgery, including laparoscopy and robotic surgery. Robotic surgery, with advanced three-dimensional vision, is supposed to have fewer complications than laparoscopy. We aim to compare iAEs between laparoscopic (LA) and robotic (RA) procedures and correlate them with postoperative complications and risk factor analysis. Methods A prospective study was conducted in a tertiary care center between July and October 2023 with 80 cases (myomectomy, hysterectomy, and endometriosis resection). Intraoperative (as per ClassIntra classification) and postoperative (as per Clavien-Dindo classification) complications were recorded, and data was analyzed using IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, Version 26 (Released 2019; IBM Corp., Armonk, New York, United States). Categorical variables were summarized as n (%), while quantitative variables were summarized by mean ±S.D. A p-value less than 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was done for risk analysis (adjusted odds ratio with 95% confidence interval). Results Overall, we reported 3.75% (3/80) iAEs (all in LA) and 32.5% (26/80) postoperative complications. Increased postoperative complications were seen in LA 15/40 (37.5%) than in RA 11/40 (27.5%). However, the difference was statistically insignificant (p =0.12 and p =0.47). Cases with higher iAE grades consecutively experienced higher postoperative complications (p 0.0001). The independent clinical risk factors, ASA score II status (aOR: 2.335, 95%CI: 0.707-7.709), increasing uterine size (aOR: 1.076, 95%CI: 0.953-1.214), endometriosis (aOR: 2.337, 95%CI: 0.615-8.878), previous surgical history (aOR: 1.595, 95%CI: 0.544-4.677), and lower preoperative hemoglobin (aOR: 0.721, 95%CI: 0.502-1.036), affecting postoperative complications were analyzed. However, none of the factors had a statistically significant association with postoperative complications. Conclusions We observed lesser complication rates in robotic surgery than in conventional laparoscopy. We also found that those with higher iAE grades were strongly associated with higher postoperative complication grades.

Keywords: complications; intraoperative; laparoscopy; postoperative; robotic.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Human subjects: Consent for treatment and open access publication was obtained or waived by all participants in this study. Institutional Ethics Committee -Biomedical Research Apollo Hospitals, Hyderabad issued approval AHJ-ACD-012/05-23, dated 28-07-2023. Animal subjects: All authors have confirmed that this study did not involve animal subjects or tissue. Conflicts of interest: In compliance with the ICMJE uniform disclosure form, all authors declare the following: Payment/services info: All authors have declared that no financial support was received from any organization for the submitted work. Financial relationships: All authors have declared that they have no financial relationships at present or within the previous three years with any organizations that might have an interest in the submitted work. Other relationships: All authors have declared that there are no other relationships or activities that could appear to have influenced the submitted work.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Laparoscopic versus robotic abdominal and pelvic surgery: a systematic review of randomised controlled trials. Kawka M, Fong Y, Gall TM. Surg Endosc. 2023;37:6672–6681. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Robotic-assisted benign hysterectomy compared with laparoscopic, vaginal, and open surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lenfant L, Canlorbe G, Belghiti J, et al. J Robot Surg. 2023;17:2647–2662. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Robot-assisted surgery in gynaecology. Lawrie TA, Liu H, Lu D, Dowswell T, Song H, Wang L, Shi G. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2019;4:0. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Complications in laparoscopic and robotic-assisted surgery: definitions, classifications, incidence and risk factors - an up-to-date review. Watrowski R, Kostov S, Alkatout I. Wideochir Inne Tech Maloinwazyjne. 2021;16:501–525. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Classification of surgical complications: a new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey. Dindo D, Demartines N, Clavien PA. Ann Surg. 2004;240:205–213. - PMC - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources