Robotic Compared With Conventional Laparoscopic Hysterectomy: A Randomized Controlled Trial

OBJECTIVE: To compare surgical outcome and quality of life of robot-assisted laparoscopic hysterectomy with conventional laparoscopic hysterectomy. METHODS: For this controlled clinical trial, patients with benign indications for hysterectomy were randomized to receive either a robotic (robotic group) or conventional laparoscopic hysterectomy (conventional group). The primary end point was total operating time; secondary end points were perioperative outcome, blood loss, and the change in quality of life. RESULTS: Ninety-five patients out of 100 randomized patients completed the study. Patient age, body mass index, and uterus weight showed no significant differences between both groups. All results are given as mean (±standard deviation; median). Total operating time for the robotic group was significantly higher with 106 (±29; 103) compared with 75 (±21; 74) (conventional group) minutes. Blood loss, complications, analgesics use, and return to activity for both groups were comparable. The change in preoperative to postoperative quality-of-life index (quality of life measured on a linear scale from 0 to 100) was significantly higher in the robotic group, with 13 (±10; 13) compared with 5 (±14; 5) (conventional group). CONCLUSION: Robot-assisted laparoscopic hysterectomy and conventional laparoscopy compare well in most surgical aspects, but the robotic procedure is associated with longer operating times. Postoperative quality-of-life index was better; however, long-term, there was no difference. However, subjective postoperative parameters such as analgesic use and return to activity showed no significant difference between both groups. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, www.clinicaltrials.gov, NCT00683293. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: I

[1]  S. Walsh,et al.  Total abdominal hysterectomy versus total laparoscopic hysterectomy for benign disease: a meta-analysis. , 2009, European journal of obstetrics, gynecology, and reproductive biology.

[2]  Z. Holub [Robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery in gynecology: scientific dream or reality?]. , 2007, Ceska gynekologie.

[3]  P. Gehrig,et al.  Perioperative Outcomes of Robotically Assisted Hysterectomy for Benign Cases With Complex Pathology , 2009, Obstetrics and gynecology.

[4]  A. Kasuya EuroQol--a new facility for the measurement of health-related quality of life. , 1990, Health policy.

[5]  R. Brooks EuroQol: the current state of play. , 1996, Health policy.

[6]  M. Canis,et al.  The learning curve of total laparoscopic hysterectomy: comparative analysis of 1647 cases. , 2002, The Journal of the American Association of Gynecologic Laparoscopists.

[7]  W. Spellacy A multicenter randomized comparison of laparoscopically assisted vaginal hysterectomy and abdominal hysterectomy in abdominal hysterectomy candidates , 1998, Obstetrics and gynecology.

[8]  R Core Team,et al.  R: A language and environment for statistical computing. , 2014 .

[9]  C. Steiner,et al.  Hysterectomy Rates in the United States 1990–1997 , 2002, Obstetrics and gynecology.

[10]  R Kevin Reynolds,et al.  Robot-assisted laparoscopic hysterectomy: technique and initial experience. , 2006, American journal of surgery.

[11]  S. Nakagawa,et al.  Nationwide Use of Laparoscopic Hysterectomy Compared With Abdominal and Vaginal Approaches , 2009, Obstetrics and gynecology.

[12]  A. Shashoua,et al.  Robotic-Assisted Total Laparoscopic Hysterectomy Versus Conventional Total Laparoscopic Hysterectomy , 2009, JSLS : Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons.

[13]  A. Advincula,et al.  The role of robotic surgery in gynecology , 2007, Current opinion in obstetrics & gynecology.

[14]  T. Falcone,et al.  Robotic-assisted laparoscopic microsurgical tubal anastomosis: a human pilot study. , 2000, Fertility and sterility.

[15]  J. Donnez,et al.  A series of 400 laparoscopic hysterectomies for benign disease: a single centre, single surgeon prospective study of complications confirming previous retrospective study , 2010, BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology.

[16]  G. Phillips,et al.  A detailed analysis of the learning curve: robotic hysterectomy and pelvic-aortic lymphadenectomy for endometrial cancer. , 2009, Gynecologic oncology.

[17]  Lori Weinberg,et al.  Robotic Surgery in Gynecology: An Updated Systematic Review , 2011, Obstetrics and gynecology international.

[18]  Sarfraz Ahmad,et al.  Robotically assisted laparoscopic hysterectomy versus total abdominal hysterectomy and lymphadenectomy for endometrial cancer. , 2008, Gynecologic oncology.

[19]  The Team 2011 , 2011 .

[20]  K. Kluivers,et al.  Quality of Life After Laparoscopic and Abdominal Hysterectomy: A Randomized Controlled Trial , 2012, Obstetrics and gynecology.

[21]  Jennifer M Wu,et al.  Hysterectomy Rates in the United States, 2003 , 2007, Obstetrics and gynecology.

[22]  T. N. Payne,et al.  A comparison of total laparoscopic hysterectomy to robotically assisted hysterectomy: surgical outcomes in a community practice. , 2008, Journal of minimally invasive gynecology.

[23]  A. Advincula,et al.  Evolving role and current state of robotics in minimally invasive gynecologic surgery. , 2009, Journal of minimally invasive gynecology.

[24]  G. Schaer,et al.  Robotic hysterectomy versus conventional laparoscopic hysterectomy: outcome and cost analyses of a matched case-control study. , 2010, European journal of obstetrics, gynecology, and reproductive biology.

[25]  H. Hubert,et al.  Comparison of minimally invasive surgical approaches for hysterectomy at a community hospital: robotic-assisted laparoscopic hysterectomy, laparoscopic-assisted vaginal hysterectomy and laparoscopic supracervical hysterectomy , 2010, Journal of robotic surgery.

[26]  W. Parker Total laparoscopic hysterectomy. , 2000, Obstetrics and gynecology clinics of North America.

[27]  Fernández,et al.  Total Laparoscopic Hysterectomy , 1996, The Journal of the American Association of Gynecologic Laparoscopists.

[28]  A. Shamshirsaz,et al.  New technologies for reproductive medicine: laparoscopy, endoscopy, robotic surgery and gynecology. A review of the literature. , 2010, Minerva ginecologica.

[29]  Matt Moore,et al.  Comparing robot-assisted with conventional laparoscopic hysterectomy: impact on cost and clinical outcomes. , 2010, Journal of minimally invasive gynecology.

[30]  M. Candiani,et al.  Laparoscopic versus vaginal hysterectomy for benign pathology , 2010, Current opinion in obstetrics & gynecology.

[31]  A. Williams EuroQol : a new facility for the measurement of health-related quality of life , 1990 .

[32]  Concepcion R. Diaz-Arrastia,et al.  Laparoscopic hysterectomy using a computer-enhanced surgical robot , 2002, Surgical Endoscopy And Other Interventional Techniques.