Robotic Shaving Technique in 25 Patients Affected by Deep Infiltrating Endometriosis of the Rectovaginal Space

Role of robot-assisted laparoscopy in deep infiltrating endometriosis with bowel involvement: a systematic review and application of the IDEAL framework

AIMS

This review aims to evaluate the feasibility of robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery (RALS) as an alternative to standard laparoscopic surgery (SLS) for the treatment of bowel deep-infiltrative endometriosis. Additionally, it aims to provide guidance for future study design, by gaining insight into the current state of research, in accordance with the IDEAL framework.

METHOD

A systematic review was conducted to identify relevant studies on RALS for bowel deep infiltrating endometriosis in Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library and PubMed databases up to August 2023 and reported in keeping with PRISMA guidelines. The study was registered with PROSPERO Registration: CRD42022308611 RESULTS: Eleven primary studies were identified, encompassing 364 RALS patients and 83 SLS patients, from which surgical details, operative and postoperative outcomes were extracted. In the RALS group, mean operating time was longer (235 ± 112 min) than in the standard laparoscopy group (171 ± 76 min) (p < 0.01). Patients in the RALS group experienced a shorter hospital stay (5.3 ± 3.5 days vs. 7.3 ± 4.1 days) (p < 0.01), and appeared to have fewer postoperative complications compared to standard laparoscopy. Research evidence for RALS in bowel DE is at an IDEAL Stage 2B of development.

CONCLUSION

RALS is a safe and feasible alternative to standard laparoscopy for bowel endometriosis treatment, with a shorter overall length of stay despite longer operating times. Further robust randomized trials recommended to delineate other potential advantages of RALS.

[The results of colorectal resection for bowel deep infiltrating endometriosis]

OBJECTIVE

To study the early postoperative outcomes of segmental bowel resections in patients with colorectal endometriosis.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A retrospective study included 60 patients diagnosed with deep infiltrative endometriosis who underwent surgical treatment with segmental bowel resection between 2016 and 2022.

RESULTS

All surgeries performed by two teams (gynecologic & colorectal). 59 operations were performed by laparoscopic access and one open. The average operation time was 263.5±86.0 min, estimated blood loss 126.1 ml (10-400 ml). There were no intraoperative complications. There were no conversions during laparoscopic surgery. A protective stoma was not required in any patient. The median postoperative hospital stay was 7.5±4.2 days. Bowel function was restored by an average of 4.3±3.1 days. Postoperative complications were in 7 cases (11.6%). Anastomotic leakage occurred in one patient (1.6%). The incidence of urine retention requiring repeated bladder catheterization was 2 (3.3%).

CONCLUSION

The use of a minimally invasive multidisciplinary approach makes it possible to perform the required volume of surgery with excision of all tissues affected by endometriosis with a low level of complications and the absence of conversions.

Robotic treatment of bowel endometriosis

Endometriosis describes a condition with the presence of ectopic endometrial glands and stroma outside the endometrial cavity that affects up to 15% of reproductive-aged women. Of women affected with endometriosis, 3.8-37% will have endometriosis involving the bowel, primarily the rectosigmoid colon. While medical management is often recommended as a first-line therapy, it is not curative, and surgery is often required as an adjunct for the management of symptoms. Minimally invasive surgery has become the standard of care for managing these patients. The use of robotic-assisted laparoscopy offers benefits that may allow surgeons to perform these challenging surgical cases using a minimally invasive technique. For lesions that affect the colon, there are three primary techniques used for removal which include: 1) rectal shaving, 2) discoid excision and 3) segmental resection. The decision to pursue one approach over another is largely dependent on the number of lesions present, a lesion's size and depth of invasion as well as the involved circumference of the bowel. The available evidence of using robotic-assisted laparoscopy in cases of bowel endometriosis is limited in the literature. In this review, we will summarize the role of robotic-assisted laparoscopy in the management of bowel endometriosis.

Transanal minimally invasive rectal resection for deep endometriosis: a promising technique

AIM

Surgical management of patients with deep endometriosis (DE) of the rectum is difficult. Inflammation and subsequent adhesions due to DE impede access to the lower pelvis and may lead to complications during laparoscopic low anterior resection (LAR). Transanal minimally invasive surgery (TAMIS) is an alternative to an abdominal approach with potential advantages. The aim of this study was to provide a description of the TAMIS technique and to present the perioperative results of TAMIS and of conventional LAR in patients with DE.

METHOD

A prospective consecutive cohort of patients undergoing rectal resection for DE had either conventional laparoscopic LAR or TAMIS rectal excision. Pre-, intra- and postoperative parameters, such as patient symptomatology, operating time and postoperative complications were compared between the groups. Quality of life was assessed using the EORTC-QLQ-29/30 questionnaires.

RESULTS

Between May 2014 and March 2016 a total of 11 rectal resections were performed, including five TAMIS procedures. No differences were found in the pre-, intra- or postoperative parameters. Two major complications occurred after conventional LAR and none after TAMIS. No differences in quality of life were found between the groups.

CONCLUSION

Transanal minimally invasive surgery for DE of the rectum is feasible. Potential advantages include better surgical access to the pelvis, possibly fewer complications than LAR and no extraction incision with no difference in quality of life. Larger prospective studies are required to compare TAMIS with conventional rectal resection.

'Money for nothing'. The role of robotic-assisted laparoscopy for the treatment of endometriosis

Despite higher costs for robotic-assisted laparoscopy (RAL) than standard laparoscopy (SL), RAL treatment of endometriosis is performed without established indications. PubMed/MEDLINE was searched for 'robotic surgery' and 'endometriosis' or 'gynaecological benign disease' from January 2000 to December 2016. Full-length studies in English reporting original data were considered. Among 178 articles retrieved, 17 were eligible: 11 non-comparative (RAL only) and six comparative (RAL versus SL). Non-comparative studies included 445 patients. Mean operating time, blood loss and hospital stay were 226 min, 168 ml and 4 days. Major complications and laparotomy conversions were 3.1% and 1.3%. Eight studies reported pain improvement at 15-month follow-up. Comparative studies were all retrospective; 749 women underwent RAL and 705 SL. Operating time was longer for RAL in five studies. Major complications and laparotomy conversions for RAL and SL were 1.5% versus 0.3% and 0.3% versus 0.5%. One study reported pain reduction for RAL at 6-month follow-up. RAL treatment of endometriosis did not provide benefits over SL, overall and among subgroups of women with severe endometriosis, peritoneal endometriosis and obesity. Available evidence is low-quality, and data regarding long-term pain relief and pregnancy rates are lacking. RAL treatment of endometriosis should be performed only within controlled studies.

Robotic-assisted laparoscopy in reproductive surgery: a contemporary review

Robotic surgery is a conceptual fusion of the conventional open surgery and the minimally invasive laparoscopic surgery. We reviewed the current role of robotic-assisted laparoscopy in the field of reproductive surgery by a literature search in PubMed database. We analyzed the reported advantages and limitations of the use of robotics in reproductive surgeries like myomectomy, tubal reanastomosis, endometriosis, ovarian tissue cryopreservation, and ovarian transposition. Overall, robotic assistance in reproductive surgery resulted in decreased blood loss, less post-operative pain, shorter hospital stay, and faster convalescence, whereas reproductive outcomes were similar to open/laparoscopic approaches. The main drawbacks of robotic surgery were higher cost and longer operating times. It is as safe and effective as the conventional laparoscopy and represents a reasonable alternate to abdominal approach. Procedures that are technically challenging with the conventional laparoscopy can be performed with robotic assistance. It has advantages of improved visualization and Endowrist™ movements allowing precise suturing. This helps to overcome the limitations of laparoscopy, especially in complicated procedures, and may shorten the steep learning curve in minimal invasive surgery. Randomized controlled trials looking at both short- and long-term outcomes are warranted to strengthen the role of robotic surgery in the field of reproductive surgery.