Robotic Adnexectomy Compared With Laparoscopy for Adnexal Mass

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether the application of robotic technology in the performance of adnexectomy resulted in benefits for the patient when compared with patients operated by laparoscopy. METHODS: Evaluation of 85 patients undergoing robotic adnexectomy and comparison with a group of 91 patients operated on by laparoscopy during the same period of time and by the same surgeons. Patients were compared by age, body mass index (BMI), American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status classification, indications, unilateral compared with bilateral adnexectomy, adhesions, size or weight or both of the adnexal mass, and previous abdominal or pelvic surgery. Univariate and multivariate analysis was used to determine factors favorable to each technique. Comparison between the groups was evaluated using the Fisher exact test from a one-way analysis of variance. RESULTS: The robotic group had an increased number of obese (BMI 30 or more) and higher anesthetic risk (ASA classification 2 and 3) patients as compared with laparoscopy patients. The mean operating time was 12 minutes longer in the robotic group (P=.01). The mean blood loss (80 mL robotic, 71 mL laparoscopic), length of hospital stay (0.15 days robotic, 0.28 days laparoscopic), intraoperative complications (1% robotic, 2% laparoscopic), and postoperative complications (12% robotic, 11% laparoscopic) were similar in both groups. CONCLUSION: Laparoscopy and robotics provided similar results for the performance of adnexectomy, with similar blood loss, intraoperative and postoperative complications, and length of hospital stay. Robotics mean operating time was 12 minutes longer. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: II

[1]  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.

[2]  M. Canis,et al.  Management of adnexal masses: role and risk of laparoscopy. , 2000, Seminars in surgical oncology.

[3]  L. Mettler The cystic adnexal mass: patient selection, surgical techniques and long-term follow-up , 2001, Current opinion in obstetrics & gynecology.

[4]  P. O'Mara,et al.  Salpingo-oophorectomy: clinical and financial analyses of laparoscopic and open techniques. , 1994, The Journal of the American Association of Gynecologic Laparoscopists.

[5]  J. Hentz,et al.  Robotic hysterectomy: technique and initial outcomes. , 2007, American journal of obstetrics and gynecology.

[6]  A. Weaver,et al.  Robotic radical hysterectomy: comparison with laparoscopy and laparotomy. , 2008, Gynecologic oncology.

[7]  M. Müller-Steinhardt,et al.  Laparoscopy in patients over 60 years old: a prospective, randomized evaluation of laparoscopic versus open adnexectomy. , 2005, American journal of obstetrics and gynecology.

[8]  G. Vilos,et al.  Cost-benefit analysis of laparoscopic versus laparotomy salpingo-oophorectomy for benign tubo-ovarian disease. , 1995, The Journal of the American Association of Gynecologic Laparoscopists.

[9]  J. Magrina,et al.  Robotic appendectomy in gynaecological surgery: technique and pathological findings , 2008, The international journal of medical robotics + computer assisted surgery : MRCAS.

[10]  Orr,et al.  Trends in Oophorectomy by Laparoscopic versus Open Techniques , 1996, The Journal of the American Association of Gynecologic Laparoscopists.

[11]  P. Takacs,et al.  Laparoscopic adnexectomy: a comparison with laparotomy. , 1994, American journal of obstetrics and gynecology.