Total laparoscopic hysterectomy versus da Vinci robotic hysterectomy: Is using the robot beneficial?

Enrique Soto, Yungtai Lo, Kathryn Friedman, Carlos Soto, Farr Nezhat, Linus Chuang, Herbert Gretz

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

36 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objective: To compare the outcomes of total laparoscopic to robotic approach for hysterectomy and all indicated procedures after controlling for surgeon and other confounding factors. Methods: Retrospective chart review of all consecutive cases of total laparoscopic and da Vinci robotic hysterectomies between August 2007 and July 2009 by two gynecologic oncology surgeons. Our primary outcome measure was operative procedure time. Secondary measures included complications, conversion to laparotomy, estimated blood loss and length of hospital stay. A mixed model with a random intercept was applied to control for surgeon and other confounders. Wilcoxon rank-sum, chi-square and Fisher's exact tests were used for the statistical analysis. Results: The 124 patients included in the study consisted of 77 total laparoscopic hysterectomies and 47 robotic hysterectomies. Both groups had similar baseline characteristics, indications for surgery and additional procedures performed. The difference between the mean operative procedure time for the total laparoscopic hysterectomy group (111.4 minutes) and the robotic hysterectomy group (150.8 minutes) was statistically significant (p=0.0001) despite the fact that the specimens obtained in the total laparoscopic hysterectomy group were significantly larger (125 g vs. 94 g, p=0.002). The robotic hysterectomy group had statistically less estimated blood loss than the total laparoscopic hysterectomy group (131.5 mL vs. 207.7 mL, p=0.0105) however no patients required a blood transfusion in either group. Both groups had a comparable rate of conversion to laparotomy, intraoperative complications, and length of hospital stay. Conclusion: Total laparoscopic hysterectomy can be performed safely and in less operative time compared to robotic hysterectomy when performed by trained surgeons.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)253-259
Number of pages7
JournalJournal of Gynecologic Oncology
Volume22
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - 2011
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Robotics
Hysterectomy
Length of Stay
Operative Time
Operative Surgical Procedures
Laparotomy
Intraoperative Complications
Blood Transfusion
Outcome Assessment (Health Care)

Keywords

  • Da Vinci robot
  • Robotic hysterectomy
  • Total laparoscopic hysterectomy

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Obstetrics and Gynecology
  • Oncology

Cite this

Total laparoscopic hysterectomy versus da Vinci robotic hysterectomy : Is using the robot beneficial? / Soto, Enrique; Lo, Yungtai; Friedman, Kathryn; Soto, Carlos; Nezhat, Farr; Chuang, Linus; Gretz, Herbert.

In: Journal of Gynecologic Oncology, Vol. 22, No. 4, 2011, p. 253-259.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Soto, Enrique ; Lo, Yungtai ; Friedman, Kathryn ; Soto, Carlos ; Nezhat, Farr ; Chuang, Linus ; Gretz, Herbert. / Total laparoscopic hysterectomy versus da Vinci robotic hysterectomy : Is using the robot beneficial?. In: Journal of Gynecologic Oncology. 2011 ; Vol. 22, No. 4. pp. 253-259.
@article{cc4651efb95744bfb69fdcfee9e8062c,
title = "Total laparoscopic hysterectomy versus da Vinci robotic hysterectomy: Is using the robot beneficial?",
abstract = "Objective: To compare the outcomes of total laparoscopic to robotic approach for hysterectomy and all indicated procedures after controlling for surgeon and other confounding factors. Methods: Retrospective chart review of all consecutive cases of total laparoscopic and da Vinci robotic hysterectomies between August 2007 and July 2009 by two gynecologic oncology surgeons. Our primary outcome measure was operative procedure time. Secondary measures included complications, conversion to laparotomy, estimated blood loss and length of hospital stay. A mixed model with a random intercept was applied to control for surgeon and other confounders. Wilcoxon rank-sum, chi-square and Fisher's exact tests were used for the statistical analysis. Results: The 124 patients included in the study consisted of 77 total laparoscopic hysterectomies and 47 robotic hysterectomies. Both groups had similar baseline characteristics, indications for surgery and additional procedures performed. The difference between the mean operative procedure time for the total laparoscopic hysterectomy group (111.4 minutes) and the robotic hysterectomy group (150.8 minutes) was statistically significant (p=0.0001) despite the fact that the specimens obtained in the total laparoscopic hysterectomy group were significantly larger (125 g vs. 94 g, p=0.002). The robotic hysterectomy group had statistically less estimated blood loss than the total laparoscopic hysterectomy group (131.5 mL vs. 207.7 mL, p=0.0105) however no patients required a blood transfusion in either group. Both groups had a comparable rate of conversion to laparotomy, intraoperative complications, and length of hospital stay. Conclusion: Total laparoscopic hysterectomy can be performed safely and in less operative time compared to robotic hysterectomy when performed by trained surgeons.",
keywords = "Da Vinci robot, Robotic hysterectomy, Total laparoscopic hysterectomy",
author = "Enrique Soto and Yungtai Lo and Kathryn Friedman and Carlos Soto and Farr Nezhat and Linus Chuang and Herbert Gretz",
year = "2011",
doi = "10.3802/jgo.2011.22.4.253",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "22",
pages = "253--259",
journal = "Journal of Gynecologic Oncology",
issn = "2005-0380",
publisher = "Korean Society of Gynecologic Oncology and Colposcopy",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Total laparoscopic hysterectomy versus da Vinci robotic hysterectomy

T2 - Is using the robot beneficial?

AU - Soto, Enrique

AU - Lo, Yungtai

AU - Friedman, Kathryn

AU - Soto, Carlos

AU - Nezhat, Farr

AU - Chuang, Linus

AU - Gretz, Herbert

PY - 2011

Y1 - 2011

N2 - Objective: To compare the outcomes of total laparoscopic to robotic approach for hysterectomy and all indicated procedures after controlling for surgeon and other confounding factors. Methods: Retrospective chart review of all consecutive cases of total laparoscopic and da Vinci robotic hysterectomies between August 2007 and July 2009 by two gynecologic oncology surgeons. Our primary outcome measure was operative procedure time. Secondary measures included complications, conversion to laparotomy, estimated blood loss and length of hospital stay. A mixed model with a random intercept was applied to control for surgeon and other confounders. Wilcoxon rank-sum, chi-square and Fisher's exact tests were used for the statistical analysis. Results: The 124 patients included in the study consisted of 77 total laparoscopic hysterectomies and 47 robotic hysterectomies. Both groups had similar baseline characteristics, indications for surgery and additional procedures performed. The difference between the mean operative procedure time for the total laparoscopic hysterectomy group (111.4 minutes) and the robotic hysterectomy group (150.8 minutes) was statistically significant (p=0.0001) despite the fact that the specimens obtained in the total laparoscopic hysterectomy group were significantly larger (125 g vs. 94 g, p=0.002). The robotic hysterectomy group had statistically less estimated blood loss than the total laparoscopic hysterectomy group (131.5 mL vs. 207.7 mL, p=0.0105) however no patients required a blood transfusion in either group. Both groups had a comparable rate of conversion to laparotomy, intraoperative complications, and length of hospital stay. Conclusion: Total laparoscopic hysterectomy can be performed safely and in less operative time compared to robotic hysterectomy when performed by trained surgeons.

AB - Objective: To compare the outcomes of total laparoscopic to robotic approach for hysterectomy and all indicated procedures after controlling for surgeon and other confounding factors. Methods: Retrospective chart review of all consecutive cases of total laparoscopic and da Vinci robotic hysterectomies between August 2007 and July 2009 by two gynecologic oncology surgeons. Our primary outcome measure was operative procedure time. Secondary measures included complications, conversion to laparotomy, estimated blood loss and length of hospital stay. A mixed model with a random intercept was applied to control for surgeon and other confounders. Wilcoxon rank-sum, chi-square and Fisher's exact tests were used for the statistical analysis. Results: The 124 patients included in the study consisted of 77 total laparoscopic hysterectomies and 47 robotic hysterectomies. Both groups had similar baseline characteristics, indications for surgery and additional procedures performed. The difference between the mean operative procedure time for the total laparoscopic hysterectomy group (111.4 minutes) and the robotic hysterectomy group (150.8 minutes) was statistically significant (p=0.0001) despite the fact that the specimens obtained in the total laparoscopic hysterectomy group were significantly larger (125 g vs. 94 g, p=0.002). The robotic hysterectomy group had statistically less estimated blood loss than the total laparoscopic hysterectomy group (131.5 mL vs. 207.7 mL, p=0.0105) however no patients required a blood transfusion in either group. Both groups had a comparable rate of conversion to laparotomy, intraoperative complications, and length of hospital stay. Conclusion: Total laparoscopic hysterectomy can be performed safely and in less operative time compared to robotic hysterectomy when performed by trained surgeons.

KW - Da Vinci robot

KW - Robotic hysterectomy

KW - Total laparoscopic hysterectomy

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84857682683&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84857682683&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.3802/jgo.2011.22.4.253

DO - 10.3802/jgo.2011.22.4.253

M3 - Article

C2 - 22247802

AN - SCOPUS:84857682683

VL - 22

SP - 253

EP - 259

JO - Journal of Gynecologic Oncology

JF - Journal of Gynecologic Oncology

SN - 2005-0380

IS - 4

ER -