Robotic hysterectomy versus conventional laparoscopic hysterectomy: outcome and cost analyses of a matched case-control study

An eight-year analysis of robotic surgery in morbidly obese women with endometrial cancer in a tertiary center in Singapore

Introduction

Surgical management of endometrial cancer is a total hysterectomy, bilateral salphingo-oophorectomy and pelvic lymph node dissection (THBSO-PLND), which is a challenging surgery in the morbidly obese. Data on morbidly obese women undergoing robotic surgery is limited in Asia. We share our experience in Singapore and aim to demonstrate that robotic surgery is safe and effective in morbidly obese women with endometrial cancer.

Materials and Methods

We performed a retrospective analysis of patients with BMI > 40 kg/m2, who underwent robotic surgery from January 2016 to September 2023 at the Singapore General Hospital. We recruited a total of 33 patients who underwent robotic surgery for endometrial malignancy and analysed surgical outcomes, operative complications, and survival rates.

Results

The average age of patients was 53 years and mean BMI 45.7. The average operative time was 232 min and average blood loss 184 ml. 3 patients had THBSO while 27 underwent THBSO-PLND. None required conversion to laparotomy. 4 patients required a mini-laparotomy for the retrieval of bulky uterus. 12 required adhesiolysis. 6 patients had additional omentectomy done. The average inpatient stay was 4.8 days. The 1-year mortality rate is 0. However, 1 patient passed away 13 months after surgery due to complications from bowel obstruction and another passed away 39 months later due to disease recurrence. 1 patient readmitted on POD6 due to post-op ileus and another for port-site hematoma. Both were managed conservatively.

Conclusion

Robotic surgery is a safe and effective alternative surgical tool for women who are morbidly obese with endometrial cancer.

Inpatient Hospital Costs and Route of Hysterectomy for Management of Benign Uterine Disease in the 90-Day Global Billing Period

OBJECTIVE

To compare inpatient hospital costs and complication rates within the 90-day global billing period among routes of hysterectomy.

METHODS

The Premier Healthcare Database was used to identify patients who underwent hysterectomy between 2000 and 2020. Current Procedural Terminology codes were used to group patients based on route of hysterectomy. Comorbidities and complications were identified using International Classification of Diseases codes. Fixed, variable, and total costs for inpatient care were compared. Fixed costs consist of costs that are set for the case, such as operating room time or surgeon costs. Variable costs include disposable and reusable items that are billed additionally. Total costs equal fixed and variable costs combined. Data were analyzed using analysis of variance, t test, and χ 2 test, as appropriate. Factors independently associated with increased total costs were assessed using linear mixed effects models. Multivariate logistic regression was performed to evaluate associations between the route of surgery and complication rates.

RESULTS

A cohort of 400,977 patients were identified and grouped by route of hysterectomy. Vaginal hysterectomy demonstrated the lowest inpatient total cost ($6,524.00 [interquartile range $4,831.60, $8,785.70]), and robotic-assisted laparoscopic hysterectomy had the highest total cost ($9,386.80 [interquartile range $6,912.40, $12,506.90]). These differences persisted with fixed and variable costs. High-volume laparoscopic and robotic surgeons (more than 50 cases per year) had a decrease in the cost difference when compared with costs of vaginal hysterectomy. Abdominal hysterectomy had a higher rate of complications relative to vaginal hysterectomy (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.52, 95% CI, 1.39-1.67), whereas laparoscopic (aOR 0.85, 95% CI, 0.80-0.89) and robotic-assisted (aOR 0.92, 95% CI, 0.84-1.00) hysterectomy had lower rates of complications compared with vaginal hysterectomy.

CONCLUSION

Robotic-assisted hysterectomy is associated with higher surgical costs compared with other approaches, even when accounting for surgeon volume. Complication rates are low for minimally invasive surgery, and it is unlikely that the robotic-assisted approach provides an appreciable improvement in perioperative outcomes.

Regional practice variation in hysterectomy and the implementation of less invasive surgical procedures: A register-based study in the Netherlands

INTRODUCTION

Many women experience bleeding disorders that may have an anatomical or unexplained origin. Although hysterectomy is the most definitive and common treatment, it is highly invasive and resource-intensive. Less invasive therapies are therefore advised before hysterectomy for women with fibroids or bleeding disorders. This study has two aims related to treating bleeding disorders and uterine fibroids in the Netherlands: (1) to evaluate the regional variations in prevalence and surgical approaches; and (2) to assess the associations between regional rates of hysterectomies and less invasive surgical techniques to analyze whether hysterectomy can be replaced in routine practice.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We completed a register-based study of claims data for bleeding disorders and fibroids in women between 2016 and 2020 using data from Statistics Netherlands for case-mix adjustment. Crude and case-mix adjusted regional hysterectomy rates were examined overall and by surgical approach. Coefficients of variation were used to measure regional variation and regression analyses were used to evaluate the association between hysterectomy and less invasive procedure rates across regions.

RESULTS

Overall, 14 186 and 8821 hysterectomies were performed for bleeding disorders and fibroids, respectively. Laparoscopic approaches predominated (bleeding disorders 65%, fibroids 49%), followed by vaginal (bleeding disorders 24%, fibroids 5%) and abdominal (bleeding disorders 11%, fibroids 46%) approaches. Substantial regional differences were noted in both hysterectomy rates and the surgical approaches. For bleeding disorders, regional hysterectomy rates were positively associated with endometrial ablation rates (β = 0.11; P = 0.21) and therapeutic hysteroscopy rates (β = 0.14; P = 0.31). For fibroids, regional hysterectomy rates were positively associated with therapeutic hysteroscopy rates (β = 0.10; P = 0.34) and negatively associated with both embolization rates (β = -0.08; P = 0.08) and myomectomy rates (β = -0.03; P = 0.82).

CONCLUSIONS

Regional variation exists in the rates of hysterectomy and minimally invasive techniques. The absence of a significant substitution effect provides no clear evidence that minimally invasive techniques have replaced hysterectomy in clinical practice. However, although the result was not significant, embolization could be an exception based on its stronger negative association.

Surgical outcomes and cost analysis of a multi-specialty robotic-assisted surgery caseload in the Australian public health system

This study aims to compare surgical outcomes and in-hospital cost between robotic-assisted surgery (RAS), laparoscopic and open approaches for benign gynaecology, colorectal and urological patients and to explore the association between cost and surgical complexity. This retrospective cohort study included consecutive patients undergoing RAS, laparoscopic or open surgery for benign gynaecology, colorectal or urological conditions between July 2018 and June 2021 at a major public hospital in Sydney. Patients' characteristics, surgical outcomes and in-hospital cost variables were extracted from the hospital medical records using routinely collected diagnosis-related groups (DRG) codes. Comparison of the outcomes within each surgical discipline and according to surgical complexity were performed using non-parametric statistics. Of the 1,271 patients included, 756 underwent benign gynaecology (54 robotic, 652 laparoscopic, 50 open), 233 colorectal (49 robotic, 123 laparoscopic, 61 open) and 282 urological surgeries (184 robotic, 12 laparoscopic, 86 open). Patients undergoing minimally invasive surgery (robotic or laparoscopic) presented with a significantly shorter length of hospital stay when compared to open surgical approach (P < 0.001). Rates of postoperative morbidity were significantly lower in robotic colorectal and urological procedures when compared to laparoscopic and open approaches. The total in-hospital cost of robotic benign gynaecology, colorectal and urological surgeries were significantly higher than other surgical approaches, independent of the surgical complexity. RAS resulted in better surgical outcomes, especially when compared to open surgery in patients presenting with benign gynaecology, colorectal and urological diseases. However, the total cost of RAS was higher than laparoscopic and open surgical approaches.

Robotic and laparoscopic gynaecological surgery: a prospective multicentre observational cohort study and economic evaluation in England

OBJECTIVE

To compare the health-related quality of life and cost-effectiveness of robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery (RALS) versus conventional 'straight stick' laparoscopic surgery (CLS) in women undergoing hysterectomy as part of their treatment for either suspected or proven gynaecological malignancy.

DESIGN

Multicentre prospective observational cohort study.

SETTING

Patients aged 16+ undergoing hysterectomy as part of their treatment for gynaecological malignancy at 12 National Health Service (NHS) cancer units and centres in England between August 2017 and February 2020.

PARTICIPANTS

275 patients recruited with 159 RALS, 73 CLS eligible for analysis.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Primary outcome was the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life measure (EORTC). Secondary outcomes included EuroQol-5 Dimension (EQ-5D-5L) utility, 6-minute walk test (6MWT), NHS costs using pounds sterling (£) 2018-2019 prices and cost-effectiveness. The cost-effectiveness evaluation compared EQ-5D-5L quality adjusted life years and costs between RALS and CLS.

RESULTS

No difference identified between RALS and CLS for EORTC, EQ-5D-5L utility and 6MWT. RALS had unadjusted mean cost difference of £556 (95% CI -£314 to £1315) versus CLS and mean quality adjusted life year (QALY) difference of 0.0024 (95% CI -0.00051 to 0.0057), non-parametric incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of £231 667per QALY. For the adjusted cost-effectiveness analysis, RALS dominated CLS with a mean cost difference of -£188 (95% CI -£1321 to £827) and QALY difference of 0.0024 (95% CI -0.0008 to 0.0057).

CONCLUSIONS

Findings suggest that RALS versus CLS in women undergoing hysterectomy (after adjusting for differences in morbidity) is cost-effective with lower costs and QALYs. Results are highly sensitive to the usage of robotic hardware with higher usage increasing the probability of cost-effectiveness. Non-inferiority randomised controlled trial would be of benefit to decision-makers to provide further evidence on the cost-effectiveness of RALS versus CLS but may not be practical due to surgical preferences of surgeons and the extensive roll out of RALS.

Surgical approach to hysterectomy for benign gynaecological disease

BACKGROUND

Currently, there are five major approaches to hysterectomy for benign gynaecological disease: abdominal hysterectomy (AH), vaginal hysterectomy (VH), laparoscopic hysterectomy (LH), robotic-assisted hysterectomy (RH) and vaginal natural orifice hysterectomy (V-NOTES). Within the LH category we further differentiate the laparoscopic-assisted vaginal hysterectomy (LAVH) from the total laparoscopic hysterectomy (TLH) and single-port laparoscopic hysterectomy (SP-LH).

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness and safety of different surgical approaches to hysterectomy for women with benign gynaecological conditions.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following databases (from their inception to December 2022): the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Specialised Register of Controlled Trials, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL and PsycINFO. We also searched the trial registries and relevant reference lists, and communicated with experts in the field for any additional trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in which clinical outcomes were compared between one surgical approach to hysterectomy and another.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

At least two review authors independently selected trials, assessed risk of bias and performed data extraction. Our primary outcomes were return to normal activities, satisfaction and quality of life, intraoperative visceral injury and major long-term complications (i.e. fistula, pelvic-abdominal pain, urinary dysfunction, bowel dysfunction, pelvic floor condition and sexual dysfunction).

MAIN RESULTS

We included 63 studies with 6811 women. The evidence for most comparisons was of low or moderate certainty. The main limitations were poor reporting and imprecision. Vaginal hysterectomy (VH) versus abdominal hysterectomy (AH) (12 RCTs, 1046 women) Return to normal activities was probably faster in the VH group (mean difference (MD) -10.91 days, 95% confidence interval (CI) -17.95 to -3.87; 4 RCTs, 274 women; I2 = 67%; moderate-certainty evidence). This suggests that if the return to normal activities after AH is assumed to be 42 days, then after VH it would be between 24 and 38 days. We are uncertain whether there is a difference between the groups for the other primary outcomes. Laparoscopic hysterectomy (LH) versus AH (28 RCTs, 3431 women) Return to normal activities may be sooner in the LH group (MD -13.01 days, 95% CI -16.47 to -9.56; 7 RCTs, 618 women; I2 = 68%, low-certainty evidence), but there may be more urinary tract injuries in the LH group (odds ratio (OR) 2.16, 95% CI 1.19 to 3.93; 18 RCTs, 2594 women; I2 = 0%; moderate-certainty evidence). This suggests that if the return to normal activities after abdominal hysterectomy is assumed to be 37 days, then after laparoscopic hysterectomy it would be between 22 and 25 days. It also suggests that if the rate of ureter injury during abdominal hysterectomy is assumed to be 0.2%, then during laparoscopic hysterectomy it would be between 0.2% and 2%. We are uncertain whether there is a difference between the groups for the other primary outcomes. LH versus VH (22 RCTs, 2135 women) We are uncertain whether there is a difference between the groups for any of our primary outcomes. Both short- and long-term complications were rare in both groups. Robotic-assisted hysterectomy (RH) versus LH (three RCTs, 296 women) None of the studies reported satisfaction rates or quality of life. We are uncertain whether there is a difference between the groups for our other primary outcomes. Single-port laparoscopic hysterectomy (SP-LH) versus LH (seven RCTs, 621 women) None of the studies reported satisfaction rates, quality of life or major long-term complications. We are uncertain whether there is a difference between the groups for rates of intraoperative visceral injury. Total laparoscopic hysterectomy (TLH) versus laparoscopic-assisted vaginal hysterectomy (LAVH) (three RCTs, 233 women) None of the studies reported satisfaction rates or quality of life. We are uncertain whether there is a difference between the groups for rates of intraoperative visceral injury or major long-term complications. Transvaginal natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (V-NOTES) versus LH (two RCTs, 96 women) We are uncertain whether there is a difference between the groups for rates of bladder injury. Our other primary outcomes were not reported. Overall, adverse events were rare in the included studies.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Among women undergoing hysterectomy for benign disease, VH appears to be superior to AH. When technically feasible, VH should be performed in preference to AH because it is associated with faster return to normal activities, fewer wound/abdominal wall infections and shorter hospital stay. Where VH is not possible, LH has advantages over AH including faster return to normal activities, shorter hospital stay, and decreased risk of wound/abdominal wall infection, febrile episodes or unspecified infection, and transfusion. These advantages must be balanced against the increased risk of ureteric injury and longer operative time. When compared to LH, VH was associated with no difference in time to return to normal activities but shorter operative time and shorter hospital stay. RH and V-NOTES require further evaluation since there is a lack of evidence of any patient benefit over conventional LH. Overall, the evidence in this review has to be interpreted with caution as adverse event rates were low, resulting in low power for these comparisons. The surgical approach to hysterectomy should be discussed with the patient and decided in the light of the relative benefits and hazards. Surgical expertise is difficult to quantify and poorly reported in the available studies and this may influence outcomes in ways that cannot be accounted for in this review. In conclusion, when VH is not feasible, LH has multiple advantages over AH, but at the cost of more ureteric injuries. Evidence is limited for RH and V-NOTES.

Index cost comparison of laparoscopic vs robotic surgery in colon and rectal cancer resection: a retrospective financial investigation of surgical methodology innovation at a single institution

BACKGROUND

Robotic assisted colorectal cancer resection (R-CR) has become increasingly commonplace in contrast to traditional laparoscopic cancer resection (L-CR). The aim of this study was to compare the total direct costs of R-CR to that of L-CR and to compare the groups with respect to costs related to LOS.

METHODS

Patients who underwent colon and/or rectal cancer resection via R-CR or L-CR instrumentation between January 1, 2015 and December 31 2018, at our institution, were evaluated and compared. Primary outcomes were overall cost, supply cost, operating time and cost, postoperative length of stay (LOS), and postoperative LOS cost. Secondary outcomes were readmission within 30 days and mortality during the surgery.

RESULTS

Two hundred forty R-CR (mean age 64.9 ± 12.4 years) and 258 L-CR (mean age 66.4 ± 15.5 years) patients met the inclusion criteria. The overall mean direct cost between R-CR and L-CR was significantly higher ($8756 vs $7776 respectively, p=0.001) as well as the supply cost per case ($3789 vs $2122, p < 0.001). Operating time was also higher for R-CR than L-CR (224 min vs 187 min, p = 0.066) but LOS was slightly lower (5.08 days vs 5.55 days, p = 0.113).

CONCLUSIONS

Cost is the main obstacle to easy and widespread use of the platform at this junction, though new developments and competition could very well reduce costs. Supply cost was the main reason for increased costs with robotic resection.

Real-world evidence in health technology assessment of high-risk medical devices: Fit for purpose?

Health technology assessment (HTA) of medical devices (MDs) increasingly rely on real-world evidence (RWE). The aim of this study was to evaluate the type and the quality of the evidence used to assess the (cost-)effectiveness of high risk MDs (Class III) by HTA agencies in Europe (four European HTA agencies and EUnetHTA), with particular focus on RWE. Data were extracted from HTA reports on the type of evidence demonstrating (cost-)effectiveness, and the quality of observational studies of comparative effectiveness using the Good Research for Comparative Effectiveness principles. 25 HTA reports were included that incorporated 28 observational studies of comparative effectiveness. Half of the studies (46%) took important confounding and/or effect modifying variables into account in the design and/or analyses. The most common way of including confounders and/or effect modifiers was through multivariable regression analysis. Other methods, such as propensity score matching, were rarely employed. Furthermore, meaningful analyses to test key assumptions were largely omitted. Resulting recommendations from HTA agencies on MDs is therefore (partially) based on evidence which is riddled with uncertainty. Considering the increasing importance of RWE it is important that the quality of observational studies of comparative effectiveness are systematically assessed when used in decision-making.

Surgical outcome of benign cases with pelvic adhesions undergoing robotic total hysterectomy

BACKGROUND

Robotic total hysterectomies have been considered contraindicated for patients with intra-abdominal adherences, but the evidence for this is not strong, and we hypothesized that the procedure can be of benefit even in these cases. In our research, we analyzed how the severity of pelvic adhesions affects robotic total hysterectomy, and by comparing different types of adhesions, we can further identify the outcomes differences in between, which may aid in future surgical decision making.

METHODS

Prospective cohort study (Canadian Task Force classification II-2). All 410 patients with uterine myoma or adenomyosis undergoing robotic total hysterectomies between 2011 and 2016 using the da Vinci Si system by the same surgeon in Taipei Medical University Hospital were included in the study.

RESULTS

Baseline characteristics, blood loss, docking time, operation time, time to perform uterine artery ligation (UAL), pain score, hospital stay, complication rate, and laparotomy conversion rate were analyzed between benign cases with or without pelvic adhesions undergoing robotic total hysterectomy. Furthermore, in our subgroups analysis, we have divided the patients with adhesion into different groups according to the severity of adhesion. The abdomen and pelvic cavity was divided into nine sections, and the outcomes of different adhesion condition were compared. We found that patients with adhesions had increased docking time and operation time, but other differences between groups were not statistically significant. The results of the adhesion group showed no significant increases in blood loss, intra- and postoperative complications, and length of hospital stay. Only significantly longer surgical time compared with the normal group was noted.

CONCLUSION

Our results suggest that robotic total hysterectomies with UAL are effective and safe for patients with benign gynecologic conditions, and the surgical method should be considered even for patients with adhesion risks.

Outcomes of robotic and laparoscopic surgery for benign gynaecological disease: a systematic review

Benign gynaecological diseases are usually treated with minimally invasive approaches. Robotic surgery seems an alternative to laparoscopic surgery. No definitive conclusions have yet been made regarding comparison of robotic versus laparoscopic surgery for benign diseases. In this scenario, we performed a systematic review in order to assess the advantages and disadvantages of laparoscopy versus robotic surgery and conclude whether laparoscopy should be replaced by robotic surgery for the treatment of benign gynaecological conditions, following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) Statement. We included 64 studies: no significant difference was observed regarding overall complication rate; no significant benefit of robotic approach was demonstrated regarding length of hospital stay and conversion to laparotomy; furthermore, robotic surgery is more easily used by non-experienced surgeons, while it is more expensive and characterised by longer operative time. In conclusion, current evidence indicates neither statistically significant nor clinically meaningful differences in surgical outcomes between robotic and laparoscopic surgeries for benign gynaecological diseases. Impact statementWhat is already known on this subject? Benign gynaecological diseases are usually treated with minimally invasive approaches. Nevertheless, no definitive conclusions have yet been made regarding comparison of robotic versus laparoscopic surgery for benign diseases.What do the results of this study add? No significant difference was observed regarding overall complication rate; no significant benefit of robotic approach was demonstrated regarding length of hospital stay and conversion to laparotomy; furthermore, robotic surgery is more easily used by non-experienced surgeon, while it is more expensive and characterised by longer operative time.What are the implications of these findings for clinical practice and/or further research? Robotic surgery should not replace laparoscopy for the treatment of benign gynaecological conditions; in addition, gynaecologic surgeon should offer robotic surgery for benign diseases only after a proper counselling and a balanced decision-making process involving the patient.

Operating costs, fiscal impact, value analysis and guidance for the routine use of robotic technology in abdominal surgical procedures

BACKGROUND

This study was designed to define the value, cost, and fiscal impact of robotic-assisted procedures in abdominal surgery and provide clinical guidance for its routine use.

METHODS

34,984 patients who underwent an elective cholecystectomy, colectomy, inguinal hernia repair, hysterectomy, or appendectomy over a 24-month period were analyzed by age, BMI, risk class, operating time, LOS and readmission rate. Average Direct and Total Cost per Case (ADC, TCC) and Net Margin per Case (NM) were produced for each surgical technique, i.e., open, laparoscopic, and robotic assisted (RA).

RESULTS

All techniques were shown to have similar clinical outcomes. 9412 inguinal herniorrhaphy were performed (48% open with $2138 ADC, 29% laparoscopy with $3468 ADC, 23% RA with $6880 ADC); 8316 cholecystectomies (94% laparoscopy with $2846 ADC, 4.4% RA with a $7139 ADC, 16% open with a $3931 ADC); 3432 colectomies (42% open with a $12,849 ADC, 38% laparoscopy with a $10,714, 20% RA with a $15,133); 12,614 hysterectomies [42% RA with a $8213 Outpatient (OP) ADC, 39% laparoscopy $5181 OP ADC, 19% open $4894 OP ADC]. Average Global NM is - 1% for RA procedures and only positive with commercial payors.

CONCLUSION

RA techniques do not produce significant clinical enhancements than similar surgical techniques with identical outcomes while their costs are much higher. The produced value analysis does not support the routine use of RA techniques for inguinal hernia repair and cholecystectomy. RA techniques for hysterectomies and colectomies are also performed at much higher cost than open and laparoscopic techniques, should only be routinely used with appropriate clinical justification and by cost efficient surgical providers.

Predictors of the cost of hysterectomy for benign indications

INTRODUCTION

Hysterectomy is a commonly performed procedure with widely variable costs. As gynecologists divert from invasive to minimally invasive approaches, many factors come into play in determining hysterectomy cost and efforts should be sought to minimize it. Our objective was to identify the predictors of hysterectomy cost.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort study where women who underwent hysterectomy for benign conditions at the University of Texas Medical Branch from 2009 to 2016 were identified. We obtained and analyzed demographic, operative, and financial data from electronic medical records and the hospital finance department.

RESULTS

We identified 1,847 women. Open hysterectomy was the most frequently practiced (35.8 %), followed by vaginal (23.7 %), laparoscopic (23.6 %), and robotic (16.9 %) approaches. Multivariate regression demonstrated that hysterectomy charges can be significantly predicted from surgical approach, patient's age, operating room (OR) time, length of stay (LOS), estimated blood loss, insurance type, fiscal year, and concomitant procedures. Charges increased by $3,723.57 for each day increase in LOS (P <0.001), by $76.02 for each minute increase in OR time (P <0.001), and by $48.21 for each one-year increase in age (P 0.037). Adjusting for LOS and OR time remarkably decreased the cost of open and robotic hysterectomy, respectively when compared with the vaginal approach.

CONCLUSION

Multiple demographic and operative factors can predict the cost of hysterectomy. Healthcare providers, including gynecologists, are required to pursue additional roles in proper resource management and be acquainted with the cost drivers of therapeutic interventions. Future efforts and policies should target modifiable factors to minimize cost and promote value-based practices.

Robotic versus laparoscopic hysterectomy in morbidly obese women for endometrial cancer

Surgery is the mainstay treatment for endometrial cancer and complex atypical endometrial hyperplasia. These conditions are more common in the obese women and as such these patients pose additional risks and challenges to surgery. Laparoscopic hysterectomy (LH) is preferred over open surgery in obese patients as it reduces surgical morbidity. However, more recently, robotic-assisted hysterectomy (RH) has been used in morbidly obese patients to overcome the limitations of conventional laparoscopy. To compare the surgical outcomes of morbidly obese patients undergoing LH or RH for endometrial cancer or complex atypical hyperplasia. A retrospective analysis of morbidly obese patients (BMI > 40 kg/m²) who underwent LH or RH for endometrial cancer or complex atypical hyperplasia at the Chris O'Brien Lifehouse Gynaecological Oncology Unit from 2015 to 2019 was performed. Data was collected from the prospectively maintained gynaecology oncology database and descriptive analysis was performed. 33 (51.6%) underwent LH and 31 (48.4%) had RH. More LHs were performed 2015-2017 period, whereas there were more RHs performed in 2018-2019 period (p = 0.01). The difference between theatre time use and operating time for LH surgery compared to RH was significantly shorter (45.7 for LH versus 61.9 min for RH, p = 0.009). RH was performed more commonly when BMI was > 50 kg/m² (p = 0.02). There has been an increase in the use of RH in morbidly obese patients, particularly for women with a BMI > 50 kg/m².

Direct cost of hysterectomy: comparison of robotic versus other routes

The aim of this study was to investigate the direct cost of robotic hysterectomy in comparison with abdominal, vaginal, and laparoscopic routes past the initial learning curve. We examined a consecutive case series of 348 patients undergoing abdominal (AH), vaginal (VH), laparoscopic (LH), or robotic hysterectomy (RH) for benign conditions between January 2015 and March 2017. The primary outcome was the direct cost of hysterectomy, while the secondary outcome was length of stay. Multiple linear regression was used to examine the cost and length of stay across the four hysterectomy groups after controlling for potential confounding variables. 19 (5.5%) patients underwent AH, 53 (15.2%) LH, and 59 (16.9%) VH, while 217 (62.4%) RH. VH group was the oldest at age 52.1 years (p < 0.01), whereas AH group had the highest BMI at 35.9 kg/m² (p = 0.03). While colporrhaphy was most frequently performed in VH (81%), mid-urethral sling was most common in RH (30%) (p < 0.01). The average direct cost was $3865 for RH, $4063 for AH, $2791 for VH, and $3818 for LH. Upon multivariate analysis, RH and VH were $650.47 (p < 0.01) and $883.07 (p < 0.01) cheaper, respectively, compared to AH. The average length of stay was the shortest for RH at 10.7 h, followed by LH at 15.5 h, vaginal at 20 h, and abdominal at 51.5 h (p < 0.01). VH has the lowest direct cost, while AH has the highest. Both VH and RH have a significantly lower cost than that of AH. RH has the shortest hospital stay, whereas AH has the longest.

Robot-assisted surgery in gynaecology

BACKGROUND

This is an updated merged review of two originally separate Cochrane reviews: one on robot-assisted surgery (RAS) for benign gynaecological disease, the other on RAS for gynaecological cancer. RAS is a relatively new innovation in laparoscopic surgery that enables the surgeon to conduct the operation from a computer console, situated away from the surgical table. RAS is already widely used in the United States for hysterectomy and has been shown to be feasible for other gynaecological procedures. However, the clinical effectiveness and safety of RAS compared with conventional laparoscopic surgery (CLS) have not been clearly established and require independent review.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness and safety of RAS in the treatment of women with benign and malignant gynaecological disease.

SEARCH METHODS

For this update, we searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE via Ovid, and EMBASE via Ovid, on 8 January 2018. We searched www.ClinicalTrials.gov. on 16 January 2018.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing RAS versus CLS or open surgery in women requiring surgery for gynaecological disease.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed studies for inclusion and risk of bias, and extracted study data and entered them into an Excel spreadsheet. We examined different procedures in separate comparisons and for hysterectomy subgrouped data according to type of disease (non-malignant versus malignant). When more than one study contributed data, we pooled data using random-effects methods in RevMan 5.3.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 12 RCTs involving 1016 women. Studies were at moderate to high overall risk of bias, and we downgraded evidence mainly due to concerns about risk of bias in the studies contributing data and imprecision of effect estimates. Procedures performed were hysterectomy (eight studies) and sacrocolpopexy (three studies). In addition, one trial examined surgical treatment for endometriosis, which included resection or hysterectomy. Among studies of women undergoing hysterectomy procedures, two studies involved malignant disease (endometrial cancer); the rest involved non-malignant disease.• RAS versus CLS (hysterectomy)Low-certainty evidence suggests there might be little or no difference in any complication rates between RAS and CLS (risk ratio (RR) 0.92, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.54 to 1.59; participants = 585; studies = 6; I² = 51%), intraoperative complication rates (RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.24 to 2.50; participants = 583; studies = 6; I² = 37%), postoperative complications (RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.48 to 1.34; participants = 629; studies = 6; I² = 44%), and blood transfusions (RR 1.94, 95% CI 0.63 to 5.94; participants = 442; studies = 5; I² = 0%). There was no statistical difference between malignant and non-malignant disease subgroups with regard to complication rates. Only one study reported death within 30 days and no deaths occurred (very low-certainty evidence). Researchers reported no survival outcomes.Mean total operating time was longer on average in the RAS arm than in the CLS arm (mean difference (MD) 41.18 minutes, 95% CI -6.17 to 88.53; participants = 148; studies = 2; I² = 80%; very low-certainty evidence), and the mean length of hospital stay was slightly shorter with RAS than with CLS (MD -0.30 days, 95% CI -0.53 to -0.07; participants = 192; studies = 2; I² = 0%; very low-certainty evidence).• RAS versus CLS (sacrocolpopexy)Very low-certainty evidence suggests little or no difference in rates of any complications between women undergoing sacrocolpopexy by RAS or CLS (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.21 to 4.24; participants = 186; studies = 3; I² = 78%), nor in intraoperative complications (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.09 to 7.59; participants = 108; studies = 2; I² = 47%). Low-certainty evidence on postoperative complications suggests these might be higher with RAS (RR 3.54, 95% CI 1.31 to 9.56; studies = 1; participants = 68). Researchers did not report blood transfusions and deaths up to 30 days.Low-certainty evidence suggests that RAS might be associated with increased operating time (MD 40.53 min, 95% CI 12.06 to 68.99; participants = 186; studies = 3; I² = 73%). Very low-certainty evidence suggests little or no difference between the two techniques in terms of duration of stay (MD 0.26 days, 95% CI -0.15 to 0.67; participants = 108; studies = 2; I² = 0%).• RAS versus open abdominal surgery (hysterectomy)A single study with a total sample size of 20 women was included in this comparison. For most outcomes, the sample size was insufficient to show any possible differences between groups.• RAS versus CLS for endometriosisA single study with data for 73 women was included in this comparison; women with endometriosis underwent procedures ranging from relatively minor endometrial resection through hysterectomy; many of the women included in this study had undergone previous surgery for their condition. For most outcomes, event rates were low, and the sample size was insufficient to detect potential differences between groups.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Evidence on the effectiveness and safety of RAS compared with CLS for non-malignant disease (hysterectomy and sacrocolpopexy) is of low certainty but suggests that surgical complication rates might be comparable. Evidence on the effectiveness and safety of RAS compared with CLS or open surgery for malignant disease is more uncertain because survival data are lacking. RAS is an operator-dependent expensive technology; therefore evaluating the safety of this technology independently will present challenges.

Infectious complications of laparoscopic and robotic hysterectomy: a systematic literature review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

We performed a systematic review of the literature and meta-analysis of the infectious complications of hysterectomy, comparing robotic-assisted hysterectomy to conventional laparoscopic-assisted hysterectomy.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, CINAHL, CDSR, and EMBASE through July 2018 for studies evaluating robotic-assisted hysterectomy, laparoscopic-assisted hysterectomy, and infectious complications. We employed random-effect models to obtain pooled OR estimates. Heterogeneity was evaluated with I2 estimation and the Cochran Q statistic. Pooled ORs were calculated separately based on the reason for hysterectomy (eg, benign uterine diseases, endometrial cancer, and cervical cancer).

RESULTS

Fifty studies were included in the final review for the meta-analysis with 176 016 patients undergoing hysterectomy. There was no statistically significant difference in the number of infectious complication events between robotic-assisted hysterectomy and laparoscopic-assisted hysterectomy (pooled OR 0.97; 95 % CI 0.74 to 1.28). When we performed a stratified analysis, similar results were found with no statistically significant difference in infectious complications comparing robotic-assisted hysterectomy to laparoscopic-assisted hysterectomy among patients with benign uterine disease (pooled OR 1.10; 95 % CI 0.70 to 1.73), endometrial cancer (pooled OR 0.97; 95 % CI 0.55 to 1.73), or cervical cancer (pooled OR 1.09; 95 % CI 0.60 to 1.97).

CONCLUSION

In our meta-analysis the rate of infectious complications associated with robotic-assisted hysterectomy was no different than that associated with conventional laparoscopic-assisted hysterectomy.

Value-based assessment of hysterectomy approaches

AIM

By evaluating operative outcomes relative to cost, we compared the value of minimally invasive hysterectomy approaches, including a technique discussed less often in the literature, laparoscopic retroperitoneal hysterectomy (LRH), which incorporates retroperitoneal dissection and ligation of the uterine arteries at their vascular origin.

METHODS

Retrospective chart review of all women (N = 2689) aged greater than or equal to 18 years who underwent hysterectomy for benign conditions from 2011 to 2013 at a high-volume hospital in Maryland, USA. Procedures included: laparoscopic supracervical hysterectomy, robotic-assisted laparoscopic hysterectomy (RALH), total laparoscopic hysterectomy, laparoscopic-assisted vaginal hysterectomy, total vaginal hysterectomy (TVH), and LRH.

RESULTS

Total vaginal hysterectomy had the highest intraoperative complication rate (9.6%; P < 0.0001) but the lowest postoperative complication rate (1.8%; P < 0.0001). Robotics had the highest postoperative complication rate (11.4%; P < 0.0001). LRH had the shortest operative time (71.2 min; P < 0.0001) and the lowest intraoperative complication rates (2.1%; P < 0.0001). LRH and TVH were the least costly (averaging $4061 and $6416, respectively), while RALH was the most costly ($9354). Taking both operative outcomes and cost into account, LRH, TVH and laparoscopic-assisted vaginal hysterectomy yielded the highest value scores; total laparoscopic hysterectomy, RALH, and laparoscopic supracervical hysterectomy yielded the lowest.

CONCLUSION

Understanding the value of surgical interventions requires an evaluation of both operative outcomes and direct hospital costs. Using a quality-cost framework, the LRH approach as performed by high-volume laparoscopic specialists emerged as having the highest calculated value.

Introduction of robotic surgery for endometrial cancer into a Brazilian cancer service: a randomized trial evaluating perioperative clinical outcomes and costs

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the clinical outcome and costs after the implementation of robotic surgery in the treatment of endometrial cancer, compared to the traditional laparoscopic approach.

METHODS

In this prospective randomized study from 2015 to 2017, eighty-nine patients with endometrial carcinoma that was clinically restricted to the uterus were randomized in robotic surgery (44 cases) and traditional laparoscopic surgery (45 cases). We compared the number of retrieved lymph nodes, total time of surgery, time of each surgical step, blood loss, length of hospital stay, major and minor complications, conversion rates and costs.

RESULTS

The ages of the patients ranged from 47 to 69 years. The median body mass index was 31.1 (21.4-54.2) in the robotic surgery arm and 31.6 (22.9-58.6) in the traditional laparoscopic arm. The median tumor sizes were 4.0 (1.5-10.0) cm and 4.0 (0.0-9.0) cm in the robotic and traditional laparoscopic surgery groups, respectively. The median total numbers of lymph nodes retrieved were 19 (3-61) and 20 (4-34) in the robotic and traditional laparoscopic surgery arms, respectively. The median total duration of the whole procedure was 319.5 (170-520) minutes in the robotic surgery arm and 248 (85-465) minutes in the traditional laparoscopic arm. Eight major complications were registered in each group. The total cost was 41% higher for robotic surgery than for traditional laparoscopic surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

Robotic surgery for endometrial cancer presented equivalent perioperative morbidity to that of traditional laparoscopic surgery. The duration and total cost of robotic surgery were higher than those of traditional laparoscopic surgery.

A systematic review about costing methodology in robotic surgery: evidence for low quality in most of the studies

OBJECTIVES

The main objective of this review was to evaluate the methodological design in studies reporting resource use and costs related to robotic surgery in gynecology.

METHODS

Systematic searches were performed in the databases PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and The Centre for Reviews and Dissemination database for relevant studies before May 2016. The quality of the methodological design was assessed with items regarding methodology from the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS). The systematic review was reported according to the PRISMA guidelines.

RESULTS

Thirty-two relevant studies were included. None of the reviewed studied fully complied with the CHEERS methodological checklist. Background and objectives, Target population and subgroups and Setting and location were covered in sufficient details in all studies whereas the Study perspective, Justification of the time horizon, Discount rate, and Estimating resources and costs were covered in less than 50%. Most of the studies (29/32) used the health care sector perspective whereas the societal perspective was applied in three studies. The time horizon was stated in 18/32 of the studies.

CONCLUSIONS

The methodological quality of studies evaluating costs of robotic surgery was low. The longest follow-up was 4 months and in general, the use of detailed cost data were lacking in most of the investigations. Key determinants, such as purchasing, maintenance costs of the robotic platform, and the use of surgical equipment, were rarely reported. If health care cost analyses lack transparency regarding cost drivers included it may not provide a true foundation for decision-making.

Comparative Perioperative Pain and Recovery in Women Undergoing Vaginal Reconstruction Versus Robotic Sacrocolpopexy

BACKGROUND

In this study of patients undergoing vaginal hysterectomy with either robotic or vaginal prolapse repair, there was no difference in quality of life in the weeks following surgery; however, less narcotics were used, less pain was documented by nurses and Surgical Pain Scale (SPS), and better performance on voiding trials was noted in those undergoing robotic sacrocolpopexy.

OBJECTIVES

Minimally invasive surgery for pelvic organ prolapse is the preferred surgical route for optimal recovery. However, information regarding patient-centered outcomes among various techniques is lacking. We sought to describe pain and quality of life in patients undergoing vaginal hysterectomy with uterosacral ligament suspension (USLS) compared with robotic-assisted sacrocolpopexy (RSC).

METHODS

This institutional review board-approved prospective cohort study enrolled consecutive patients undergoing vaginal hysterectomy with USLS or with RSC. The primary outcome was pain on postoperative day 1 using the SPS. Nursing verbal pain scores, narcotic usage, surgical data, and Short-Form Health Survey 12 at baseline and 2 and 6 weeks after surgery were collected. A sample size calculation revealed 37 subjects per group would be required.

RESULTS

Seventy-eight women were enrolled (USLS, n = 39; RSC, n = 39). There were no significant differences in scores on the SPS between groups. Subjects undergoing RSC had lower nursing verbal pain scores (P = 0.04), less narcotic consumption (P = 0.02), and lower estimated blood loss (P = 0.01) and were less likely to fail voiding trials (P < 0.001); however, surgery duration was longer (P < 0.001). After controlling for age, regression analysis revealed SPS "worst pain" was lower in the robotic arm (P = 0.01), but not in other scales of the SPS. At 2 and 6 weeks postoperatively, Short-Form Health Survey 12 scores were not different between cohorts.

CONCLUSIONS

Both USLS and RSC are minimally invasive, with similar quality-of-life scores after surgery. However, the robotic approach may be associated with less pain, less narcotic use, and better performance in voiding trials. Surgeons should consider these findings when counseling patients regarding treatment options.

Reporting and Analysis of Trial-Based Cost-Effectiveness Evaluations in Obstetrics and Gynaecology

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

The aim was to systematically review whether the reporting and analysis of trial-based cost-effectiveness evaluations in the field of obstetrics and gynaecology comply with guidelines and recommendations, and whether this has improved over time.

DATA SOURCES AND SELECTION CRITERIA

A literature search was performed in MEDLINE, the NHS Economic Evaluation Database (NHS EED) and the Health Technology Assessment (HTA) database to identify trial-based cost-effectiveness evaluations in obstetrics and gynaecology published between January 1, 2000 and May 16, 2017. Studies performed in middle- and low-income countries and studies related to prevention, midwifery, and reproduction were excluded.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Reporting quality was assessed using the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standard (CHEERS) statement (a modified version with 21 items, as we focused on trial-based cost-effectiveness evaluations) and the statistical quality was assessed using a literature-based list of criteria (8 items). Exploratory regression analyses were performed to assess the association between reporting and statistical quality scores and publication year.

RESULTS

The electronic search resulted in 5482 potentially eligible studies. Forty-five studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria, 22 in obstetrics and 23 in gynaecology. Twenty-seven (60%) studies did not adhere to 50% (n = 10) or more of the reporting quality items and 32 studies (71%) did not meet 50% (n = 4) or more of the statistical quality items. As for the statistical quality, no study used the appropriate method to assess cost differences, no advanced methods were used to deal with missing data, and clustering of data was ignored in all studies. No significant improvements over time were found in reporting or statistical quality in gynaecology, whereas in obstetrics a significant improvement in reporting and statistical quality was found over time.

LIMITATIONS

The focus of this review was on trial-based cost-effectiveness evaluations in obstetrics and gynaecology, so further research is needed to explore whether results from this review are generalizable to other medical disciplines.

CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS OF KEY FINDINGS

The reporting and analysis of trial-based cost-effectiveness evaluations in gynaecology and obstetrics is generally poor. Since this can result in biased results, incorrect conclusions, and inappropriate healthcare decisions, there is an urgent need for improvement in the methods of cost-effectiveness evaluations in this field.

Laparoscopic hysterectomy for benign indications: clinical practice guideline

Purpose

Since the introduction of minimally invasive gynecologic surgery, the percentage of advanced laparoscopic procedures has greatly increased worldwide. It seems therefore, timely to standardize laparoscopic gynecologic care according to the principles of evidence-based medicine. With this goal in mind—the Dutch Society of Gynecological Endoscopic Surgery initiated in The Netherlands the development of a national guideline for laparoscopic hysterectomy (LH). This present article provides a summary of the main recommendations of the guideline.

Methods

This guideline was developed following the Dutch guideline of medical specialists and in accordance with the AGREE II tool. Clinically important issues were firstly defined and translated into research questions. A literature search per topic was then conducted to identify relevant articles. The quality of the evidence of these articles was rated following the GRADE systematic. An expert panel consisting of 18 selected gynecologists was consulted to formulate best practice recommendations for each topic.

Results

Ten topics were considered in this guideline, including amongst others, the different approaches for hysterectomy, advice regarding tissue extraction, pre-operative medical treatment and prevention of ureter injury. This work resulted in the development of a clinical practical guideline of LH with evidence- and expert-based recommendations. The guideline is currently being implemented in The Netherlands.

Conclusion

A guideline for LH was developed. It gives an overview of best clinical practice recommendations. It serves to standardize care, provides guidance for daily practice and aims to guarantee the quality of LH at an (inter)national level.

Health care cost consequences of using robot technology for hysterectomy: a register-based study of consecutive patients during 2006-2013

The objective of this study is to examine the costs attributable to robotic-assisted laparoscopic hysterectomy from a broad healthcare sector perspective in a register-based longitudinal study. The population in this study were 7670 consecutive women undergoing hysterectomy between January 2006 and August 2013 in public hospitals in Denmark. The interventions in the study were total and radical hysterectomy performed robotic-assisted laparoscopic hysterectomy (RALH), total laparoscopic hysterectomy (TLH), or open abdominal hysterectomy (OAH). Service use in the healthcare sector was evaluated 1 year before to 1 year after the surgery. Tariffs of the activity-based remuneration system and the diagnosis-related grouping case-mix system were used for valuation of primary and secondary care, respectively. Costs attributable to RALH were estimated using a difference-in-difference analytical approach and adjusted using multivariate linear regression. The main outcome measure was costs attributable to OAH, TLH, and RALH. For benign conditions RALH generated cost savings of € 2460 (95% CI 845; 4075) per patient compared to OAH and non-significant cost savings of € 1045 (95% CI -200; 2291) when compared with TLH. In cancer patients RALH generated cost savings of 3445 (95% CI 415; 6474) per patient when compared to OAH and increased costs of € 3345 (95% CI 2348; 4342) when compared to TLH. In cancer patients undergoing radical hysterectomy, RALH generated non-significant extra costs compared to OAH. Cost consequences were primarily due to differences in the use of inpatient service. There is a cost argument for using robot technology in patients with benign disease. In patients with malignant disease, the cost argument is dependent on comparator.

Do single-use medical devices containing biopolymers reduce the environmental impacts of surgical procedures compared with their plastic equivalents?

Background

While petroleum-based plastics are extensively used in health care, recent developments in biopolymer manufacturing have created new opportunities for increased integration of biopolymers into medical products, devices and services. This study compared the environmental impacts of single-use disposable devices with increased biopolymer content versus typically manufactured devices in hysterectomy.

Methods

A comparative life cycle assessment of single-use disposable medical products containing plastic(s) versus the same single-use medical devices with biopolymers substituted for plastic(s) at Magee-Women’s Hospital (Magee) in Pittsburgh, PA and the products used in four types of hysterectomies that contained plastics potentially suitable for biopolymer substitution. Magee is a 360-bed teaching hospital, which performs approximately 1400 hysterectomies annually.

Results

There are life cycle environmental impact tradeoffs when substituting biopolymers for petroplastics in procedures such as hysterectomies. The substitution of biopolymers for petroleum-based plastics increased smog-related impacts by approximately 900% for laparoscopic and robotic hysterectomies, and increased ozone depletion-related impacts by approximately 125% for laparoscopic and robotic hysterectomies. Conversely, biopolymers reduced life cycle human health impacts, acidification and cumulative energy demand for the four hysterectomy procedures. The integration of biopolymers into medical products is correlated with reductions in carcinogenic impacts, non-carcinogenic impacts and respiratory effects. However, the significant agricultural inputs associated with manufacturing biopolymers exacerbate environmental impacts of products and devices made using biopolymers.

Conclusions

The integration of biopolymers into medical products is correlated with reductions in carcinogenic impacts, non-carcinogenic impacts and respiratory effects; however, the significant agricultural inputs associated with manufacturing biopolymers exacerbate environmental impacts.

Review of Robotic Surgery in Gynecology-The Future Is Here

The authors present a systematic review of randomized and observational, retrospective and prospective studies to compare between robotic surgery as opposed to laparoscopic, abdominal, and vaginal surgery for the treatment of both benign and malignant gynecologic indications. The comparison focuses on operative times, surgical outcomes, and surgical complications associated with the various surgical techniques. PubMed was the main search engine utilized in search of study data. The review included studies of various designs that included at least 25 women who had undergone robotic gynecologic surgery. Fifty-five studies (42 comparative and 13 non-comparative) met eligibility criteria. After careful analysis, we found that robotic surgery was consistently connected to shorter post-surgical hospitalization when compared to open surgery, a difference less significant when compared to laparoscopic surgery. Also, it seems that robotic surgery is highly feasible in gynecology. There are quite a few inconsistencies regarding operative times and estimated blood loss between the different approaches, though in the majority of studies estimated blood loss was lower in the robotic surgery group. The high variance in operative times resulted from the difference in surgeon's experience. The decision whether robotic surgery should become mainstream in gynecological surgery or remain another surgical technique in the gynecological surgeon's toolbox requires quite a few more randomized controlled clinical trials. In any case, in order to bring robotic surgery down to the front row of surgery, training surgeons is by far the most important goal for the next few years.

Perioperative surgical outcome of conventional and robot-assisted total laparoscopic hysterectomy

BACKGROUND

To evaluate surgical outcome in a consecutive series of patients with conventional and robot assisted total laparoscopic hysterectomy.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study was performed among patients with benign and malignant indications for a laparoscopic hysterectomy. Main surgical outcomes were operation room time and skin to skin operating time, complications, conversions, rehospitalisation and reoperation, estimated blood loss and length of hospital stay.

RESULTS

A total of 294 patients were evaluated: 123 in the conventional total laparoscopic hysterectomy (TLH) group and 171 in the robot TLH group. After correction for differences in basic demographics with a multivariate linear regression analysis, the skin to skin operating time was a significant 18 minutes shorter in robot assisted TLH compared to conventional TLH (robot assisted TLH 92m, conventional TLH 110m, p0.001). The presence or absence of previous abdominal surgery had a significant influence on the skin to skin operating time as did the body mass index and the weight of the uterus. Complications were not significantly different. The robot TLH group had significantly less blood loss and lower rehospitalisation and reoperation rates.

CONCLUSIONS

This study compares conventional TLH with robot assisted TLH and shows shorter operating times, less blood loss and lower rehospitalisation and reoperation rates in the robot TLH group.

Robotic single site versus robotic multiport hysterectomy in early endometrial cancer: a case control study

Objective

To compare surgical outcomes and cost of robotic single-site hysterectomy (RSSH) versus robotic multiport hysterectomy (RMPH) in early stage endometrial cancer.

Methods

This is a retrospective case-control study, comparing perioperative outcomes and costs of RSSH and RMPH in early stage endometrial cancer patients. RSSH were matched 1:2 according to age, body mass index, comorbidity, the International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetric (FIGO) stage, type of radical surgery, histologic type, and grading. Mean hospital cost per discharge was calculated summarizing the cost of daily hospital room charges, operating room, cost of supplies and length of hospital stay.

Results

A total of 23 women who underwent RSSH were matched with 46 historic controls treated by RMPH in the same institute, with the same surgical team. No significant differences were found in terms of age, histologic type, stage, and grading. Operative time was similar: 102.5 minutes in RMPH and 110 in RSSH (p=0.889). Blood loss was lower in RSSH than in RMPH (respectively, 50 mL vs. 100 mL, p=0.001). Hospital stay was 3 days in RMPH and 2 days in RSSH (p=0.001). No intraoperative complications occurred in both groups. Early postoperative complications were 2.2% in RMPH and 4.3% in RSSH. Overall cost was higher in RMPH than in RSSH (respectively, $7,772.15 vs. $5,181.06).

Conclusion

Our retrospective study suggests the safety and feasibility of RSSH for staging early endometrial cancer without major differences from the RMPH in terms of surgical outcomes, but with lower hospital costs. Certainly, further studies are eagerly warranted to confirm our findings.

Bowel injury in robotic gynecologic surgery: risk factors and management options. A systematic review

OBJECTIVE

We sought to analyze the published literature on bowel injuries in patients undergoing gynecologic robotic surgery with the aim to determine its incidence, predisposing factors, and treatment options.

DATA SOURCES

Studies included in this analysis were identified by searching PubMed Central, OVID Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases. References for all studies were also reviewed. Time frame for data analysis spanned from November 2001 through December 2014.

STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

All English-language studies reporting the incidence of bowel injury or complications during robotic gynecologic surgery were included. Studies with data duplication, not in English, case reports, or studies that did not explicitly define bowel injury incidence were excluded.

STUDY APPRAISAL AND SYNTHESIS METHODS

The Guidelines for Meta-Analyses and Systematic Reviews of Observational Studies were used to complete the systematic review with the exception of scoring study quality and a single primary reviewer.

RESULTS

In all, 370 full-text articles were reviewed and 144 met the inclusion criteria. There were 84 bowel injuries recorded in 13,444 patients for an incidence of 1 in 160 (0.62%; 95% confidence interval, 0.50-0.76%). There were no significant differences in incidence of bowel injury by procedure type. The anatomic location of injury, etiology, and management were rarely reported. Of the bowel injuries, 87% were recognized intraoperatively and the majority (58%) managed via a minimally invasive approach. Of 13,444 patients, 3 (0.02%) (95% confidence interval, 0.01-0.07%) died in the immediate postoperative period and no deaths were a result of a bowel injury.

CONCLUSION

The overall incidence of bowel injury in robotic-assisted gynecologic surgery is 1 in 160. When the location of bowel injuries were specified, they most commonly occurred in the colon and rectum and most were managed via a minimally invasive approach.

Pedagogic Approach in the Surgical Learning: The First Period of "Assistant Surgeon" May Improve the Learning Curve for Laparoscopic Robotic-Assisted Hysterectomy

Background

Hysterectomy is the most frequent surgery done with robotic assistance in the world and has been widely studied since its emergence. The surgical outcomes of the robotic hysterectomy are similar to those obtained with other minimally invasive hysterectomy techniques (laparoscopic and vaginal) and appear as a promising surgical technique in gynecology surgery. The aim of this study was to observe the learning curve of robot-assisted hysterectomy in a French surgical center, and was to evaluate the impact of the surgical mentoring.

Methods

We retrospectively collected the data from the files of the robot-assisted hysterectomies with the Da Vinci^® Surgical System performed between March 2010 and June 2014 at the Foch hospital in Suresnes (France). We first studied the operative time according to the number of cases, independently of the surgeon to determine two periods: the initial learning phase (Phase 1) and the control of surgical skills phase (Phase 2). The phase was defined by mastering the basic surgical tasks. Secondarily, we compared these two periods for operative time, blood losses, body mass index (BMI), days of hospitalizations, and uterine weight. We, finally, studied the difference of the learning curve between an experimented surgeon (S1) who practiced first the robot-assisted hysterectomies and a less experimented surgeon (S2) who first assisted S1 and then operated on his own patients.

Results

A total of 154 robot-assisted hysterectomies were analyzed. Twenty procedures were necessary to access to the control of surgical skills phase. There was a significant decrease of the operative time between the learning phase (156.8 min) compared to the control of surgical skills phase (125.8 min, p = 0.003). No difference between these two periods for blood losses, BMI, days of hospitalizations and uterine weight was demonstrated. The learning curve of S1 showed 20 procedures to master the robot-assisted hysterectomies with a significant decrease of the operative time, while the learning curve of S2 showed no improvement in operative time with respect to case number.

Conclusion

Twenty robot-assisted hysterectomies are necessary to achieve control of surgical skills. The companionship to learn robotic surgery seems also promising, by improving the learning phase for this surgical technique.

The clinical experience of robot-assisted surgery in gynecologic cancer

The comparison of robotic and conventional laparoscopic hysterectomy and pelvic lymphadenectomy in gynecologic cancer still needs to be studied. In all, 98 consecutive cases of patients with gynecologic cancer undergoing robot-assisted hysterectomy and pelvic lymphadenectomy, and another 98 consecutive cases of conventional laparoscopic hysterectomy and pelvic lymphadenectomy during the same period in the Obstetrics and Gynecology Hospital of Fudan University were included. The duration of the operation, blood loss, drainage during the first 24 h after the operation, total hospital stay, hospital stay after the operation, lymph nodes collected, perioperative complications, and the cost of each operation for both procedures were recorded. The duration of the operation was longer, and the cost of each operation was almost seven times higher in the robot group than that in the conventional laparoscopy group. But the differences with regard to blood loss, drainage during the first 24 h after the operation, total hospital stay, hospital stay after operation, the lymph nodes collected, and the rate of perioperative complications were not statistically significant. Robot-assisted surgery (RAS) in gynecologic cancer is as feasible as conventional laparoscopic surgery. We recommend further studies about the cost and effect of RAS in gynecologic cancer.

Cost analysis of minimally invasive hysterectomy vs open approach performed by a single surgeon in an Italian center

Despite the rapid uptake of robotic surgery, the effectiveness of robotically assisted hysterectomy (RAH) remains uncertain, due to the costs widely variable. Observed the different related costs of robotic procedures, in different countries, we performed a detailed economic analysis of the cost of RAH compared with total laparoscopic (TLH) and open hysterectomy (OH). The three surgical routes were matched according to age, BMI, and comorbidities. Hysterectomy costs were collected prospectively from September 2014 to September 2015. Direct costs were determined by examining the overall medical pathway for each type of intervention. Surgical procedure cost for RAH was €3598 compared with €912 for TLH and €1094 for OH. The cost of the robot-specific supplies was €2705 per intervention. When considering overall medical surgical care, the patient treatment average cost of a RAH was €4695 with a hospital stay (HS) of 2 days (range 2-4) compared with €2053 for TLH and €2846 for OH. The main driver of additional costs is disposable instruments of the robot, which is not compensated by the hospital room costs and by an experienced team staff. Implementation of strategies to reduce the cost of robotic instrumentation is due. No significant cost difference among the three procedures was observed; however, despite the optimal operative time, the experienced, surgeon and the lower HS, RAH resulted 2, 3 times and 1, 6 times more expensive in our institution than TLH and OH, respectively.

Robotic Surgery in Gynecology

Minimally invasive surgery (MIS) can be considered as the greatest surgical innovation over the past 30 years. It revolutionized surgical practice with well-proven advantages over traditional open surgery: reduced surgical trauma and incision-related complications, such as surgical-site infections, postoperative pain and hernia, reduced hospital stay, and improved cosmetic outcome. Nonetheless, proficiency in MIS can be technically challenging as conventional laparoscopy is associated with several limitations as the two-dimensional (2D) monitor reduction in-depth perception, camera instability, limited range of motion, and steep learning curves. The surgeon has a low force feedback, which allows simple gestures, respect for tissues, and more effective treatment of complications. Since the 1980s, several computer sciences and robotics projects have been set up to overcome the difficulties encountered with conventional laparoscopy, to augment the surgeon’s skills, achieve accuracy and high precision during complex surgery, and facilitate widespread of MIS. Surgical instruments are guided by haptic interfaces that replicate and filter hand movements. Robotically assisted technology offers advantages that include improved three-dimensional stereoscopic vision, wristed instruments that improve dexterity, and tremor canceling software that improves surgical precision.

Indications and Route of Hysterectomy for Benign Diseases. Guideline of the DGGG, OEGGG and SGGG (S3 Level, AWMF Registry No. 015/070, April 2015)

Background: Official guideline "indications and methods of hysterectomy" to assign indications for the different methods published and coordinated by the German Society of Gynecology and Obstetrics (DGGG), the Austrian Society of Gynecology and Obstetrics (OEGGG) and the Swiss Society of Gynecology and Obstetrics (SGGG). Besides vaginal and abdominal hysterectomy, three additional techniques have been implemented due to the introduction of laparoscopy. Organ-sparing alternatives were also integrated. Methods: The guideline group consisted of 26 experts from Germany, Austria and Switzerland. Recommendations were developed using a structured consensus process and independent moderation. A systematic literature search and quality appraisal of benefits and harms of the therapeutic alternatives for symptomatic fibroids, dysfunctional bleeding and adenomyosis was done through MEDLINE up to 6/2014 focusing on systematic reviews and meta-analysis. Results: All types of hysterectomy led in studies to high rates of patient satisfaction. If possible, vaginal instead of abdominal hysterectomy should preferably be done. If a vaginal hysterectomy is not feasible, the possibility of a laparoscopic hysterectomy should be considered. An abdominal hysterectomy should only be done with a special indication. Organ-sparing interventions also led to high patient satisfaction rates, but contain the risk of symptom recurrence. Conclusion: As an aim, patients should be enabled to choose that therapeutic intervention for their benign disease of the uterus that convenes best to them and their personal life situation.

Cost analysis when open surgeons perform minimally invasive hysterectomy

Background and Objective:

The costs to perform a hysterectomy are widely variable. Our objective was to determine hysterectomy costs by route and whether traditionally open surgeons lower costs when performing laparoscopy versus robotics.

Methods:

Hysterectomy costs including subcategories were collected from 2011 to 2013. Costs were skewed, so 2 statistical transformations were performed. Costs were compared by surgeon classification (open, laparoscopic, or robotic) and surgery route.

Results:

A total of 4,871 hysterectomies were performed: 34.2% open, 50.7% laparoscopic, and 15.1% robotic. Laparoscopic hysterectomy had the lowest total costs (P < .001). By cost subcategory, laparoscopic hysterectomy was lower than robotic hysterectomy in 6 and higher in 1. When performing robotic hysterectomy, open and robotic surgeon costs were similar. With laparoscopic hysterectomy, open surgeons had higher costs than laparoscopic surgeons for 1 of 2 statistical transformations (P = .007). Open surgeons had lower costs performing laparoscopic hysterectomy than robotic hysterectomy with robotic maintenance and depreciation included (P < .001) but similar costs if these variables were excluded.

Conclusion:

Although laparoscopic hysterectomy had lowest costs overall, robotics may be no more costly than laparoscopic hysterectomy when performed by surgeons who predominantly perform open hysterectomy.

Three-dimensional laparoscopy: Principles and practice

The largest challenge for laparoscopic surgeons is the eye–hand coordination within a three-dimensional (3D) scene observed on a 2D display. The 2D view on flat screen laparoscopy is cerebrally intensive. The loss of binocular vision on a 2D display causes visual misperceptions, mainly loss of depth perception and adds to the surgeon's fatigue. This compromises the safety of laparoscopy. The 3D high-definition view with great depth perception and tactile feedback makes laparoscopic surgery more acceptable, safe and cost-effective. It improves surgical precision and hand–eye coordination, conventional and all straight stick instruments can be used, capital expenditure is less and recurring cost and annual maintenance cost are less. In this article, we have discussed the physics of 3D laparoscopy, principles of depth perception, and the different kinds of 3D systems available for laparoscopy. We have also discussed our experience of using 3D laparoscopy in over 2000 surgeries in the last 4 years.

Cost comparison of robotic-assisted laparoscopic hysterectomy versus standard laparoscopic hysterectomy

The aim of the study was to assess if the cost of robotic-assisted total laparoscopic hysterectomy is similar to the cost of standard laparoscopic hysterectomy when performed by surgeons past their initial learning curve. A retrospective chart review of all hysterectomies was performed for benign indications without concomitant major procedures at Orange Coast Memorial Medical Center (OCMMC) and Saddleback Memorial Medical Center between January 1, 2013 and September 30, 2013. Robotic-assisted total laparoscopic hysterectomies (RTLH) and standard laparoscopic hysterectomies (LAVH and TLH) were compared. Data analyzed included only those hysterectomies performed by surgeons past their initial learning curve (minimum of 30 previous robotic cases). The primary outcome was the direct total cost of patient's hospitalization related to hysterectomy. The secondary outcomes were estimated blood loss, surgery time, and days in hospital post-surgery. A multiple linear regression model was applied to evaluate the difference between RTLH and LAVH/TLH in hospital cost, blood loss, and surgery time, while adjusting for hospital, patient's age, body mass index (BMI), whether or not the patient had previous abdominal/pelvic surgery, and uterine weight. The χ (2) test was applied to examine the association between hospital stay and surgery type. There were 93 hysterectomies (5 LAVH, 88 RTLH) performed at OCMMC and 90 hysterectomies (6 LAVH, 17 TLH, 67 RTLH) performed at Saddleback Memorial Medical Center. The hospitalization total cost result showed that, after adjusting for hospital, age, BMI, previous abdominal/pelvic surgery, and uterine weight, RTLH was not significantly more expensive than LAVH/TLH (mean diff. = $283.1, 95 % CI = [-569.6, 1135.9]; p = 0.51) at the 2 study hospitals. However, the cost at OCMMC was significantly higher than Saddleback Memorial Medical Center (mean diff. = $2008.7, 95 % CI = [1380.6, 2636.7]; p < 0.0001); and the cost increased significantly with uterine weight (β = 3.8, 95 % CI = [2.3, 5.3]; p < 0.0001). Further analysis showed significantly less blood loss (mean diff. = -78.5 ml, 95 % CI = [-116.8, -40.3]; p < 0.0001) and shorter surgery time (mean diff. = -21.9 min., 95 % CI = [-39.6, -4.2]; p = 0.016) for RTLH versus LAVH/TLH. There was no significant association between hospital stay and surgery type (p = 0.43). After adjusting for patient-level covariates, there was no statistically significant cost difference of performing robotically assisted laparoscopic hysterectomy versus standard laparoscopic hysterectomy when performed by surgeons past their initial learning curve at two community hospitals.

Cost-Effectiveness of Laparoscopic Hysterectomy With Morcellation Compared With Abdominal Hysterectomy for Presumed Myomas

STUDY OBJECTIVE

Hysterectomy for presumed leiomyomata is 1 of the most common surgical procedures performed in nonpregnant women in the United States. Laparoscopic hysterectomy (LH) with morcellation is an appealing alternative to abdominal hysterectomy (AH) but may result in dissemination of malignant cells and worse outcomes in the setting of an occult leiomyosarcoma (LMS). We sought to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of LH versus AH.

DESIGN

Decision-analytic model of 100 000 women in the United States assessing the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) in dollars per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained (Canadian Task Force classification III).

SETTING

U.S. hospitals.

PATIENTS

Adult premenopausal women undergoing LH or AH for presumed benign leiomyomata.

INTERVENTIONS

We developed a decision-analytic model from a provider perspective across 5 years, comparing the cost-effectiveness of LH to AH in terms of dollar (2014 US dollars) per QALY gained. The model included average total direct medical costs and utilities associated with the procedures, complications, and clinical outcomes. Baseline estimates and ranges for cost and probability data were drawn from the existing literature.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Estimated overall deaths were lower in LH versus AH (98 vs 103). Death due to LMS was more common in LH versus AH (86 vs 71). Base-case assumptions estimated that average per person costs were lower in LH versus AH, with a savings of $2193 ($24 181 vs $26 374). Over 5 years, women in the LH group experienced 4.99 QALY versus women in the AH group with 4.91 QALY (incremental gain of .085 QALYs). LH dominated AH in base-case estimates: LH was both less expensive and yielded greater QALY gains. The ICER was sensitive to operative costs for LH and AH. Varying operative costs of AH yielded an ICER of $87 651/QALY gained (minimum) to AH being dominated (maximum). Probabilistic sensitivity analyses, in which all input parameters and costs were varied simultaneously, demonstrated a relatively robust model. The AH approach was dominated 68.9% of the time; 17.4% of simulations fell above the willingness-to-pay threshold of $50 000/QALY gained.

CONCLUSION

When considering total direct hospital costs, complications, and morbidity, LH was less costly and yielded more QALYs gained versus AH. Driven by the rarity of occult LMS and the reduced incidence of intra- and postoperative complications, LH with morcellation may be a more cost-effective and less invasive alternative to AH and should remain an option for women needing hysterectomy for leiomyomata.

[Ongoing Development and Directions in Flexible Robotic Endoscopy]

The robotic system for flexible endoscopy was first developed as a platform enabling tissue triangulation in natural-orifice translumenal endoscopic surgery (NOTES). Then endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) was introduced and has widely been employed for the treatment of early gastrointestinal carcinoma. Subsequently, endoscopists became well aware of the limitations of their endoscopic manipulations with the conventional flexible endoscopes developed for diagnostic use, which led to the development of robotic systems for upper/lower gastrointestinal tract endoscopes intended for therapeutic use. Most flexible robotic endoscopes have 2 mechanical arms attached to the head, allowing surgeons to perform endoscopic manipulations, such as grasping, traction, incision, excision, and hemostasis. However, there are still many challenges that remain to be addressed: the ideal robotic endoscope has not yet been realized. This article reviews the ongoing developments and our own efforts in the area of flexible robotic endoscopy.