Initial experience with single-port robotic hysterectomy

• Autor(a) principal: Gomes,Mariano Tamura Vieira
• Data de Publicação: 2017
• Outros Autores: Machado,Andréa Maria Novaes, Podgaec,Sérgio, Barison,Gustavo Anderman Silva
• Tipo de documento: Artigo
• Idioma: eng
• Título da fonte: Einstein (São Paulo)
• Texto Completo: http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1679-45082017000400476
• topic: Hysterectomy; Myoma; Minimally invasive surgical procedures/methods; Gynecologic surgical procedures/methods; Uterine neoplasms; Adenomyosis; Single-port

ABSTRACT Objective: This article presents the first series of robotic single-port hysterectomy cases performed at a hospital in Brazil. Methods: From November 2014 to October 2016, 11 patients were indicated to undergo, and nine of them were submitted to single-port hysterectomy using da Vinci Single-Site® platform. However, in two patients, due to multiple previous abdominal surgeries, large uterine volume, and/or a uterus with no mobility, a pneumoperitoneum was performed with a Verres needle, and the pelvic cavity was assessed using a 5mm optics endoscope. In these cases, single-port surgery was not recommended; therefore, multiportal robotic access was chosen, and no intercurrent events were reported. Nine single-port cases were operated on by the same surgeon at Hospital Israelita Albert Einstein. Patient data analyzed included age, body mass index, previous surgeries, and clinical diagnosis. Surgical data included operative time, skin incision, report of intraoperative complications, need for conversion to laparotomy, need for transfer to intensive care unit, need for blood transfusion, inadvertent injury to other organs, length of hospital stay, and death. Results: All cases were completed with da Vinci Single-Site® system, with no intercurrent events. Four patients presented with adenomyosis as the surgical indication, two had uterine myoma, one endometrial cancer, one endometrial polyp, and one desquamative inflammatory vaginitis. The mean age of patients was 44 years (range, 40 to 54 years), and body mass index varied between 23.4 and 33.2kg/m2 (mean 26.4). No complications occurred in any of the cases, such as intestinal or bladder injury, bleeding, or the need for a second surgery. All nine procedures were completed with the robotic single-port access, and no patient required a blood transfusion. Conclusion: Although this study merely presented an initial series of patients submitted to robotic single-port surgery, it demonstrated that the method is feasible and safe, suggesting the possible use of this technique in elective hysterectomy and other gynecological procedures in the future, as described in large reference centers of advanced surgery worldwide. Specifically, in gynecological practice, existing evidence on the use of robot-assisted, single-port surgery seems promising, and although it is not indicated in all cases, it should be considered as a surgical option. Nonetheless, further randomized and controlled clinical studies are necessary to establish the preeminence of robot-assisted, single-port surgery versus single-incision and conventional laparoscopy.