Robotic or laparoscopic approach for hysterectomy: comparison of operative outcomes and cost
Öz
Purpose: The present study aimed to compare surgical outcomes and cost analysis of robotic-assisted surgery (RAS) and conventional laparoscopic surgery (CLS) hysterectomy procedures.
Materials and Methods: The patients who underwent total robotic hysterectomy or total conventional laparoscopic hysterectomy with or without bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy due to benign gynecological disorders such as uterine fibroid, abnormal uterine bleeding, endometrial hyperplasia, adenomyosis, persistent ovarian cysts, chronic pelvic pain were retrospectively evaluated.
Results: A total of 80 women underwent RAS or CLS hysterectomy during the study period. The mean total operative time was 187 ±10 min. in RAS and 133 ±24 min. in CLS groups, respectively. The mean total cost of the RAS hysterectomy group was 17.710 TL, and CLS hysterectomy group was 7000 TL.
Conclusion: Both CLS and RAS hysterectomies for benign gynecological indications are safe surgical procedures with negligible complication rates. RAS is a more expensive procedure compared to CLS.
Anahtar Kelimeler
hysterectomy, gynecology, robot-enhanced surgery
Destekleyen Kurum
None
Proje Numarası
None
Teşekkür
None
Kaynakça
- [1] Wu JM, Wechter ME, Geller EJ, Nguyen TV, Visco AG. Hysterectomy rates in the United States, 2003. Obstet Gynecol 2007; 110:1091–5.
- [2] Liao G, Zhao Z, Lin S, Li R, Yuan Y, Du S, et al. Robotic-assisted versus laparoscopic colorectal surgery: a meta-analysis of four randomized controlled trials. World J Surg Oncol 2014; 12: 122.
- [3] Tekkis PP, Senagore AJ, Delaney CP, Fazio VW. Evaluation of the learning curve in laparoscopic colorectal surgery: comparison of right-sided and left-sided resections. Ann Surg 2005; 242: 83-91.
- [4] Franasiak J KE, Kidd J, Secord AA, Bell M, Boggess JF, Gehrig PA. Physical strain and urgent need for ergonomic training among gynecologic oncologists who perform minimally invasive surgery. Gynecol Oncol 2012;126(3): 437-42.
- [5] Paley PJ VD, Shah CA, Everett EN, Bondurant AE, Drescher CW, Peters WA 3rd. Surgical outcomes in gynecologic oncology in the era of robotics: analysis of first 1000 cases. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2011;204(6):551.e1-9.
- [6] Barbash GI, Glied SA New technology and health care costs: the case of robot-assisted surgery. N Engl J Med 2010; 363:701–4.
- [7] Tapper AM, Hannola M, Zeitlin R, Isojärvi J, Sintonen H, Ikonen TS. A systematic review and cost analysis of robot-assisted hysterectomy in malignant and benign conditions. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2014; 177:1–10.
- [8] Martino MA, Berger EA, McFetridge JT, Schubella J, Gosciniac G, Wejksznr T, et al A comparison of quality outcome measures in patients having a hysterectomy for benign disease: robotic vs non-robotic approaches. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 2014; 21:389–93.
- [9] Gala RB, Margulies R, Steinberg A, Murphy M, Lukban J, Jeppson P, et al. Systematic review of robotic surgery in gynecology: robotic techniques compared with laparoscopy and laparotomy. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 2014;21:353–61.
- [10] Liu H, Lawrie TA, Lu D, Song H, Wang L, Shi G. Robot-assisted surgery in gynaecology. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2014;12: CD011422.
