Abstract
This study evaluated the feasibility and safety of robotic single port hysterectomy and laparoscopic single port hysterectomy, and to compare the perioperative parameters of the two systems. Twenty patients underwent robotic single port hysterectomy and 25 patients underwent laparoscopic single port hysterectomy. All hysterectomies were successfully performed via a single port and there were no conversions to conventional multi-port laparoscopy, multi-port robotic, open surgery, or vaginal surgery. The median operative time and hysterectomy time in robotic and laparoscopic groups were 90 vs. 90 min (P 0.74), 57.5 vs. 60 min (P 0.17), respectively. The median estimated blood loss was 40 ml in the robotic group and 50 ml in the laparoscopic group (P 0.77). No operative and post-operative complications were observed in the two groups. The median time to discharge from the hospital was one day for both techniques (P 0.17). Robotic and laparoscopic single port systems are feasible and safe for hysterectomy operation in terms of operative time, conversion to laparotomy or multiport laparoscopy/robotic rates, complication rates, and postoperative results in the hands of experienced surgeons. The possible benefits of robotic single port surgery compared with conventional laparoscopy should be evaluated in further randomized controlled studies.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Reich H, DeCaprio J, McGlynn F (1989) Laparoscopic hysterectomy. J Gynecol Surg 5:213–216
Jung YW, Kim YT, Lee DW et al (2010) The feasibility of scarless single-port transumbilical total laparoscopic hysterectomy: initial clinical experience. Surg Endosc 24:1686–1692
Kim YW, Park BJ, Ro DY, Kim TE (2010) Single-port laparoscopic myomectomy using a new single-port transumbilical morcellation system: initial clinical study. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 17:587–592
Kim TJ, Lee YY, Kim MJ et al (2009) Single-port access laparoscopic adnexal surgery. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 16:612–615
Ramirez PT (2009) Single-port laparoscopic surgery: is a single incision the next frontier in minimally invasive gynecologic surgery? Gynecol Oncol 114:143–144
Fader AN, Escobar PF (2009) Laparo endoscopic single-site surgery (LESS) in gynecologic oncology: technique and initial report. Gynecol Oncol 114:157–161
Wright JD, Barrena Medel NI, Sehouli J, Fujiwara K, Herzog TJ (2012) Contemporary management of endometrial cancer. Lancet 379(9823):1352–1360
Benedetti Panici P, Basile S, Maneschi F et al (2008) Systematic pelvic lymphadenectomy vs. no lymphadenectomy in early-stage endometrial carcinoma: randomized clinical trial. J Natl Cancer Inst 100:1707–1716
Johnson N, Barlow D, Lethaby A, Tavender F, Curr F, Garry R (2006) Surgical approach to hysterectomy for benign gynecological disease. Cochrane Database Syst Rev Issue 2, Art. No: CD003677
Eltabbach GH, Shamonki MI, Moody JM, Garafano LL (2000) Hysterectomy for obese women with endometrial cancer: laparoscopy or laparotomy? Gynecol Oncol 78:329–335
Albright BB, Witte T, Tofte AN et al (2016) Robotic versus laparoscopic hysterectomy for benign disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 23:18–27
Gungor M, Kahraman K, Ozbasli E, Genim C (2015) Ovarian cystectomy for a dermoid cyst with the new single-port robotic system. Minim Invasive Ther Allied Technol 24:123–126
Fagotti A, Gagliardi ML, Fanfani F et al (2012) Perioperative outcomes of total laparoendoscopic single-site hysterectomy versus total robotic hysterectomy in endometrial cancer patients: a multicentre study. Gynecol Oncol 125:552–555
Paek J, Lee JD, Kong TW, Chang SJ, Ryu HS (2016) Robotic single-site versus laparo endoscopic single-site hysterectomy: a propensity score matching study. Surg Endosc 33:1043–1050
Lopez S, Mulla ZD, Hernandez L, Garza DM, Payne TN, Farnam RW (2016) A comparison of outcomes between robotic-assisted, single-site laparoscopy versus laparoendoscopic single site for benign hysterectomy. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 23:84–88
da Vinci® single-site instruments and accessories (2017). Intuitive surgical Web. http://www.intuitivesurgical.com/products/davinci_surgical_system/da-vinci-single-site. Accessed 19 April 2017
da Vinci® SP™ Surgical System (2017) Intuitive surgical Web. https://www.intuitivesurgical.com/products/indication-of-use.php. Accessed 19 April 2017
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
Mete Gungor has no conflicts of interest or financial ties to disclose. Korhan Kahraman has no conflicts of interest or financial ties to disclose. Polat Dursun has no conflicts of interest or financial ties to disclose. Esra Ozbasli has no conflicts of interest or financial ties to disclose. Canan Genim has no conflicts of interest or financial ties to disclose.
Ethical standards
All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.
Informed consent
Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Gungor, M., Kahraman, K., Dursun, P. et al. Single-port hysterectomy: robotic versus laparoscopic. J Robotic Surg 12, 87–92 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11701-017-0699-8
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11701-017-0699-8