Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Robotic-Assisted Surgery Entry in Gynecological Oncology

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Laparoscopic Entry

  • 1467 Accesses

Abstract

Laparoscopic surgery has profoundly revolutionized the concept of minimally invasive surgery in the last three decades [1]. Studies have clearly shown that laparoscopy has several advantages compared with laparotomy, including faster postoperative recuperation, shorter hospitalization course, cosmetic benefits, improved intraoperative visualization, decreased blood loss, and fewer complications [2, 3]. Despite these factors, several drawbacks exist with conventional laparoscopy. These include two-dimensional views, counterintuitive hand movements, a gradual learning curve, operator fatigue, and tremor amplification [4, 5]. Computer-enhanced telesurgery, called robotic-assisted surgery, is the latest innovation in the minimally invasive surgery field. It attempts to overcome the disadvantages of conventional laparoscopy by offering improved dexterity, coordination, and visualization, and decreasing surgeon fatigue [6].

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 139.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Nezhat C, Nezhat F, Nezhat CH. Nezhat’s operative gynecologic laparoscopy with hysteroscopy. New York: Cambridge University Press; 2008.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  2. Paraiso MF, Walters MD, Rackley RR, Melek S, Hugney C. Laparoscopic and abdominal sacral colpopexies: a comparative cohort study. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2005;192:1752–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Mais V, Ajossa S, Guerriero S, Mascia M, Solla E, Melis GB. Laparoscopic versus abdominal myomectomy: a prospective, randomized trial to evaluate benefits in early outcome. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1996;174:654–8.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Stylopoulos N, Rattner D. Robotics and ergonomics. Surg Clin North Am. 2003;83:1321–37.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Desimone CP, Ueland FR. Gynecologic laparoscopy. Surg Clin North Am. 2008;88:319–41.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Nezhat C, Saberi NS, Shahmohamady B, Nezhat F. Robotic-assisted laparoscopy in gynecological surgery. JSLS. 2006;10:317–20.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Kwoh YS, Hou J, Jonckheere EA, Hayati S. A robot with improved absolute positioning accuracy for CT guided stereotactic brain surgery. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng. 1988;35:153–60.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Davies BL, Hibberd RD, Coptcoat MJ, Wickham JE. A surgeon robot prostatectomy: a laboratory evaluation. J Med Eng Technol. 1989;13:273–7.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Bauer A, Borner M, Lahmer A. Clinical experience with a medical robotic system for total hip replacement. In: Nolte LP, Ganz R, editors. Computer assisted orthopedic surgery. Bern: Hogrefe & Huber; 1999. p. 128–33.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Satava RM. Robotic surgery: from past to future–a personal journey. Surg Clin North Am. 2003;83:1491–500.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Advincula AP, Song A. The role of robotic surgery in gynecology. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol. 2007;19:331–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Sert BM, Abeler VM. Robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical hysterectomy (Piver type III) with pelvic node dissection—case report. Eur J Gynaecol Oncol. 2006;27:531–3.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Cho JE, Nezhat FR. Robotics and gynecologic oncology: review of the literature. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2009;16:669–81.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Kim YT, Kim SW, Hyung WJ, Lee SJ, Nam EJ, Lee WJ. Robotic radical hysterectomy with pelvic lymphadenectomy for cervical carcinoma: a pilot study. Gynecol Oncol. 2008;108:312–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Fanning J, Fenton B, Purohit M. Robotic radical hysterectomy. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2008;198:649. e1-4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Sert BM, Abeler VM. Robotic radical hysterectomy in early-stage cervical carcinoma patients, comparing results with total laparoscopic radical hysterectomy cases. The future is now? Int J Med Robot. 2007;3:224–8.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Nezhat FR, Datta MS, Liu C, Chuang L, Zakashansky K. Robotic radical hysterectomy versus total laparoscopic radical hysterectomy with pelvic lymphadenectomy for treatment of early cervical cancer. JSLS. 2008;12:227–37.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Zakashansky K, Chuang L, Gretz H, Nagarsheth NP, Rahaman J, Nezhat FR. A case-controlled study of total laparoscopic radical hysterectomy with pelvic lymphadenectomy versus radical abdominal hysterectomy in a fellowship training program. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2007;17:1075–82.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Boggess J, Gehrig P, Cantrell L, et al. A case control study of robotic assisted type III radical hysterectomy with pelvic lymph node dissection compared with open radical hysterectomy. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2008;19:357–9.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Lambaudie E, Houvenaeghel G, Walz J, et al. Robot- assisted laparoscopy in gynecologic oncology. Surg Endosc. 2008;22:2743–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Ko EM, Muto MG, Berkowitz RS, Felmate CM. Robotic versus open radical hysterectomy: a comparative study at a single institution. Gynecol Oncol. 2008;111:425–30.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Magrina JF, Kho RM, Weaver AL, Montero RP, Magtibay PM. Robotic radical hysterectomy: comparison with laparoscopy and laparotomy. Gynecol Oncol. 2008;109:86–91.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Molpus KL, Wedergren JS, Carlson MA. Robotically assisted endoscopic ovarian transposition. JSLS. 2003;7:59–62.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Walker JL, Piedmonte MR, Spirtos NM, et al. Laparoscopy compared with laparotomy for comprehensive surgical staging of uterine cancer: gynecologic oncology group study LAP2. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27:5331–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. DeNardis SA, Holloway RW, Bigsby GE, Pikaart DP, Ahmad S, Finkler NJ. Robotically assisted laparoscopic hysterectomy versus total abdominal hysterectomy and lymphadenectomy for endometrial cancer. Gynecol Oncol. 2008;111:412–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Diaz-Arrastia C, Jurnalov C, Gomez G, Townsend Jr C. Laparoscopic hysterectomy using a computer-enhanced surgical robot. Surg Endosc. 2002;16:1271–3.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Kho RM, Hilger WS, Hentz JG, Magtibay PM, Magrina JF. Robotic hysterectomy: technique and initial outcomes. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2007;197:113. e1-4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Field JB, Benoit MF, Dinh TA, Diaz-Arrastia C. Computer-enhanced robotic surgery in gynecologic oncology. Surg Endosc. 2007;21:244–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Veljovich DS, Paley PJ, Drescher CW, Everett EN, Shah C, Peters 3rd WA. Robotic surgery in gynecologic oncology: program initiation and outcomes after the first year with comparison with laparotomy for endometrial cancer staging. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2008;198:679. e1-9; discussion 679. e9-10.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Reynolds RK, Burke WM, Advincula AP. Preliminary experience with robot-assisted laparoscopic staging of gynecologic malignancies. JSLS. 2005;9:149–58.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Marchal F, Rauch P, Vandromme J, Laurent I, Lobontiu A, Ahcel B, et al. Telerobotic-assisted laparoscopic hysterectomy for benign and oncologic pathologies: initial clinical experience with 30 patients. Surg Endosc. 2005;19:826–31.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Marescaux J, Leroy J, Gagner M, et al. Transatlantic robot-assisted telesurgery. Nature. 2001;413:379–80.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Degueldre M, Vandromme J, Huong PT, Cadière GB. Robotically assisted laparoscopic microsurgical tubal reanastomosis: a feasibility study. Fertil Steril. 2000;74:1020–3.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Seamon LG, Bryant SA, Rheaume PS, et al. Comprehensive surgical staging for endometrial cancer in obese patients: comparing robotics and laparotomy. Obstet Gynecol. 2009;114:16–21.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Bell MC, Torgerson J, Seshadri-Kreaden U, Suttle AW, Hunt S. Comparison of outcomes and cost for endometrial cancer staging via traditional laparotomy, standard laparoscopy and robotic techniques. Gynecol Oncol. 2008;111:407–11.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Cho JE, Shamshirsaz AH, Nezhat C, Nezhat C, Nezhat F. New technologies for reproductive medicine: laparoscopy, endoscopy, robotic surgery and gynecology. A review of the literature. Minerva Ginecol. 2010;62:137–67.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Division of Gynecologic Oncology and Minimally Invasive Surgery, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA

    Farr R. Nezhat

  2. Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, St. Luke’s-Roosevelt Medical Center, New York, NY, USA

    Farr R. Nezhat

  3. Minimally Invasive Gynecologic Surgery, St. Luke’s-Roosevelt Medical Center, New York, NY, USA

    Shao-Chun R. Chang-Jackson

Authors
  1. Farr R. Nezhat
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Shao-Chun R. Chang-Jackson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. , Gynecology and Obstetric, Vito Fazzi Hospital, Lecce, 73100, Italy

    Andrea Tinelli

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2012 Springer-Verlag London Limited

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Nezhat, F.R., Chang-Jackson, SC.R. (2012). Robotic-Assisted Surgery Entry in Gynecological Oncology. In: Tinelli, A. (eds) Laparoscopic Entry. Springer, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-85729-980-2_7

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-85729-980-2_7

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, London

  • Print ISBN: 978-0-85729-979-6

  • Online ISBN: 978-0-85729-980-2

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation