Robotic-assisted benign hysterectomy compared with laparoscopic, vaginal, and open surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Journal: Journal of robotic surgery
PMID:

Abstract

The potential benefits and limitations of benign hysterectomy surgical approaches are still debated. We aimed at evaluating any differences with a systematic review and meta-analysis. PubMed, MEDLINE, and EMBASE databases were last searched on 6/2/2021 to identify English randomized controlled trials (RCTs), prospective cohort and retrospective independent database studies published between Jan 1, 2010 and Dec 31, 2020 reporting perioperative outcomes following robotic hysterectomy versus laparoscopic, open, or vaginal approach (PROSPERO #CRD42022352718). Twenty-four articles were included that reported on 110,306 robotic, 262,715 laparoscopic, 189,237 vaginal, and 554,407 open patients. The robotic approach was associated with a shorter hospital stay (p < 0.00001), less blood loss (p = 0.009), and fewer complications (OR: 0.42 [0.27, 0.66], p = 0.0001) when compared to the open approach. The main benefit compared to the laparoscopic and vaginal approaches was a shorter hospital (R/L WMD: - 0.144 [- 0.21, - 0.08], p < 0.0001; R/V WMD: - 0.39 [- 0.70, - 0.08], p = 0.01). Other benefits seen were sensitive to the inclusion of database studies. Study type differences in outcomes, a lack of RCTs for robotic vs. open comparisons, learning curve issues, and limited robotic vs. vaginal publications are limitations. While the robotic approach was mainly comparable to the laparoscopic approach, this meta-analysis confirms the classic benefits of minimally invasive surgery when comparing robotic hysterectomy to open surgery. We also reported the advantages of robotic surgery over vaginal surgery in a patient population with a higher incidence of large uterus and prior surgery.

Authors

  • Louis Lenfant
    Glickman Urological and Kidney Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA; Sorbonne University, GRC n°5, PREDICTIVE ONCO-UROLOGY, AP-HP, Hôpital Pitié-Salpêtrière, Urology, F-75013 PARIS, France.
  • Geoffroy Canlorbe
    "Service de chirurgie et cancérologie gynécologique,hôpital La Pitié-Salpêtrière, AP-HP, Sorbonne Université, Paris, France".
  • Jérémie Belghiti
    "Service de chirurgie et cancérologie gynécologique, hôpital La Pitié-Salpêtrière, AP-HP, Sorbonne Université, Paris, France".
  • Usha Seshadri Kreaden
    Biostatistics & Global Evidence Management, Intuitive Surgical Inc, Sunnyvale, CA, USA.
  • April E Hebert
    Biostatistics & Global Evidence Management, Intuitive Surgical Inc, Sunnyvale, CA, USA.
  • Marianne Nikpayam
    Department of Surgery and Oncological Gynecology, Pitié-Salpétrière University Hospital, Assistance Publique des Hôpitaux de Paris, Sorbonne University, Paris, France.
  • Catherine Uzan
    "Service de chirurgie et cancérologie gynécologique, hôpital La Pitié-Salpêtrière, AP-HP, Sorbonne Université, Paris, France".
  • Henri Azaïs
    Department of Gynecologic and Breast Oncological Surgery, European Georges-Pompidou Hospital, Paris, France. henri.azais@aphp.fr.