Role of robotic surgery in urogynecologic surgery and radical hysterectomy: how far can we go?

Robotic sacrocolpopexy: a game worth playing? A critical literature analysis

Robotic sacrocolpopexy is an advanced minimally invasive technique for the surgical management of urogenital prolapse. It offers superior precision, reduced blood loss, and lower conversion rates compared to traditional approaches. However, longer operative times, higher costs, and the need for specialized training remain the most significant challenges of robotic surgery. The advantages of robotic sacrocolpopexy are reduced intraoperative complications, lower blood loss, and decreased conversion rates compared to traditional approaches. However, it was described to involve longer operative times, increased costs, and the need for a specialized training. Additionally, the technique shows significant potential for reducing complications in obese patients and improving cosmetic outcomes. Comparative studies highlight that robotic and laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy yield similar long-term outcomes, with differences primarily in operative time and cost-efficiency robotics. The lack of standardized protocols remains a limitation, and long-term data on durability and cost-benefit analyses are needed. Future research should prioritize optimizing outcomes, reducing costs, and improving accessibility to robotic urogynecologic surgery.

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.

A systematic review and cost analysis of robot-assisted hysterectomy in malignant and benign conditions

In order to assess the effectiveness and costs of robot-assisted hysterectomy compared with conventional techniques we reviewed the literature separately for benign and malignant conditions, and conducted a cost analysis for different techniques of hysterectomy from a hospital economic database. Unlimited systematic literature search of Medline, Cochrane and CRD databases produced only two randomized trials, both for benign conditions. For the outcome assessment, data from two HTA reports, one systematic review, and 16 original articles were extracted and analyzed. Furthermore, one cost modelling and 13 original cost studies were analyzed. In malignant conditions, less blood loss, fewer complications and a shorter hospital stay were considered as the main advantages of robot-assisted surgery, like any mini-invasive technique when compared to open surgery. There were no significant differences between the techniques regarding oncological outcomes. When compared to laparoscopic hysterectomy, the main benefit of robot-assistance was a shorter learning curve associated with fewer conversions but the length of robotic operation was often longer. In benign conditions, no clinically significant differences were reported and vaginal hysterectomy was considered the optimal choice when feasible. According to Finnish data, the costs of robot-assisted hysterectomies were 1.5-3 times higher than the costs of conventional techniques. In benign conditions the difference in cost was highest. Because of expensive disposable supplies, unit costs were high regardless of the annual number of robotic operations. Hence, in the current distribution of cost pattern, economical effectiveness cannot be markedly improved by increasing the volume of robotic surgery.

Robot-assisted right colectomy: surgical technique and review of the literature

Following the successful introduction of robotic surgery to the field of urology and gynecology, its use gained even more interest among those in the field of colorectal surgery. Rectal resection is believed to be among the best suited for robotic assistance. In particular, the right hemicolectomy procedure has been proposed as a training tool in order to gain clinical experience with the robot. This article and attached video demonstrates, in detail, the robot-assisted right hemicolectomy, including key landmarks of the procedure. The case presented involved a 58-year-old man with an advanced cecal adenocarcinoma. In our opinionrobot-assisted right colon resection is a procedure that offers particular value for the novice robotic team who is in the beginning stages of their colorectal surgery experience. Although no concrete advantages for use of the robot in this particular procedure have been demonstrated in the literature, because it is a relatively straightforward and simple procedure, it can serve as a valuable training tool for the novice robotic surgeon.

Anaesthesia for Robotic Gynaecological Surgery

Robotic surgery is gaining widespread popularity due to advantages such as reduced blood loss, reduced postoperative pain, shorter hospital stay and better visualisation of fine structures. Robots are being used in urological, cardiac, thoracic, orthopaedic, gynaecological and general surgery. Robotic surgery received US Food and Drug Administration approval for use in gynaecological surgery in 2005.

The various gynaecological robotic operations being performed are myomectomy, total and supracervical hysterectomy, ovarian cystectomy, sacral colpopexy, tubal reanastomosis, lymph node dissection, surgery of retroperitoneal ectopic pregnancy, Moskowitz procedure and endometriosis surgery.

The anaesthetic considerations include difficult access to the patient intraoperatively, steep Trendelenburg position, long surgical duration and the impact of pneumoperitoneum. We highlight the complications encountered in these surgeries and methods to prevent these complications.

Robotic gynaecological surgery can be safely performed after considering the physiological effects of the steep Trendelenburg position and of pneumoperitoneum. The benefits of the surgical procedure should be weighed against the risks in patients with underlying cardiorespiratory problems.

Robot-assisted radical hysterectomy for cervical cancer: review of surgical and oncological outcomes

Robot-assisted procedures are being increasingly incorporated in gynaecologic oncology. Several studies have confirmed the feasibility and safety of robotic radical hysterectomy for selected patients with early-stage cervical cancer. It has been demonstrated that robotic radical hysterectomy offers an advantage over other surgical approaches with regard to operative time, blood loss, and hospital stay. Also initial evidences concerning oncological outcomes seem to confirm the equivalence to traditional open technique. Despite the fact that costs of robotic system are still high, they could be partially offset by several health-related and social benefits: less pain, faster dismissal, and return to full activity than other surgical approaches. The development of robotic technology may facilitate the spread of minimally invasive surgery in gynaecological oncology, overcoming some drawbacks of laparoscopic technique for challenging intervention such as radical hysterectomy. Further studies are needed to evaluate overall and disease-free survival of this technique and associated morbidity after adjuvant therapies.

The technique of robotic assisted laparoscopic surgery in gynaecology, its introduction into the clinical routine of a gynaecological department and the analysis of the perioperative courses - a German experience

OBJECTIVE

Robotic assisted surgery is an advancement on conventional laparoscopy. The first and single FDA-approved device is the da-Vinci™ system, which provides means to overcome the limitations of conventional laparoscopy. In Germany the use of the robotic system in gynaecology is at the threshold of a promising development. There is a wide spectrum of indications, such as simple and radical hysterectomies, including pelvic and paraaortic lymph node dissection. The introduction of the robotic system into the clinical routine is demonstrated.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Robotic assisted laparoscopic interventions have been performed in the reporting hospital since April 2008. In the course of treatment of 172 cases, an increasing rise of complexity of surgical procedure has been achieved. The daVinci™ system is well adaptable in clinical routine. Hitherto, the clinical outcome has been favourable, higher-grade specific complications occurred very rarely. The short time advantages are a decrease of postoperative length of stay, a reduction of postinterventional need of analgetics and an overall accelerated period of recovery has been demonstrated compared to conventional abdominal procedures. It also shows that a drastic decrease of open conventional abdominal procedures concerning uterine pathologies appeared in the reporting department.

RESULTS

Perioperative advantages of robotic assisted laparoscopic interventions are, above all, the decrease of morbidity (concerning blood loss, need of analgetics, length of stay, etc.). Surgical advantages are the more complex applicability, improved precision, dexterity and vision (3D), a greater autonomy of the surgeon, a smaller learning curve and an increase of preparation consistent with the anatomical structures. In contrast, disadvantages concern an initial greater time investment, the potentially different management of complications, the limited applicability in multiquadrant surgery and the difficulty regarding cost coverage respective to recovery.

CONCLUSIONS

In conclusion, robotic assisted minimal invasive surgery has an enormous potential in gynaecology; by simplifying the essential surgical procedure. The advantages of this technique will be approachability for a majority of gynaecological patients. The feasibility of a multitude of gynaecological surgical interventions has already been approved partially in a small number of cases. The upcoming challenge now is to verify the short and long term advantages of robotic surgery in prospective trials, especially concerning gynaecological oncology.