Research output: Contribution to Journal/Magazine › Journal article › peer-review
Research output: Contribution to Journal/Magazine › Journal article › peer-review
}
TY - JOUR
T1 - Robotic-assisted laparoscopic vs abdominal and laparoscopic myomectomy
T2 - systematic review and meta-analysis
AU - Pundir, Jyotsna
AU - Pundir, Vishal
AU - Walavalkar, Rajalaxmi
AU - Omanwa, Kireki
AU - Lancaster, Gillian
AU - Kayani, Salma
PY - 2013/5
Y1 - 2013/5
N2 - Herein is presented a systematic review and meta-analysis of evidence related to operative outcomes associated with robotic-assisted laparoscopic myomectomy (RLM) compared with abdominal myomectomy (AM) and laparoscopic myomectomy (LM). Outcome measures included estimated blood loss (EBL), blood transfusion, operating time, complications, length of hospital stay (LOHS), and costs. Meta-analysis 1 compared RLM vs AM, and meta-analysis 2 compared RLM vs LM. Studies scored moderately well on the Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale. No significant differences were found in age, body mass index, or number, diameter, and weight of myomas. In meta-analysis 1, EBL, blood transfusion, and LOHS were significantly lower; risk of complications was similar; and operating time and costs were significantly higher with RLM. In meta-analysis 2, no significant differences were noted in EBL, operating time, complications, and LOHS with RLM; however, blood transfusion risk and costs were higher. It was concluded that insofar as operative outcomes, RLM has significant short-term benefits compared with AM and no benefits compared with LM. Long-term benefits such as recurrence, fertility, and obstetric outcomes remain uncertain.
AB - Herein is presented a systematic review and meta-analysis of evidence related to operative outcomes associated with robotic-assisted laparoscopic myomectomy (RLM) compared with abdominal myomectomy (AM) and laparoscopic myomectomy (LM). Outcome measures included estimated blood loss (EBL), blood transfusion, operating time, complications, length of hospital stay (LOHS), and costs. Meta-analysis 1 compared RLM vs AM, and meta-analysis 2 compared RLM vs LM. Studies scored moderately well on the Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale. No significant differences were found in age, body mass index, or number, diameter, and weight of myomas. In meta-analysis 1, EBL, blood transfusion, and LOHS were significantly lower; risk of complications was similar; and operating time and costs were significantly higher with RLM. In meta-analysis 2, no significant differences were noted in EBL, operating time, complications, and LOHS with RLM; however, blood transfusion risk and costs were higher. It was concluded that insofar as operative outcomes, RLM has significant short-term benefits compared with AM and no benefits compared with LM. Long-term benefits such as recurrence, fertility, and obstetric outcomes remain uncertain.
KW - Abdomen
KW - Humans
KW - Laparoscopy
KW - Robotics
KW - Uterine Myomectomy
U2 - 10.1016/j.jmig.2012.12.010
DO - 10.1016/j.jmig.2012.12.010
M3 - Journal article
C2 - 23453764
VL - 20
SP - 335
EP - 345
JO - Journal of Minimally Invasive Gynecology
JF - Journal of Minimally Invasive Gynecology
SN - 1553-4650
IS - 3
ER -