Robotic versus laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy for treatment of prolapse of the apical segment of the vagina: a systematic review with meta-analysis

De Gouveia De Sa, Maribel and Claydon, Leica S. and Whitlow, Barry and Angelica Dolcet Artahona, Maria (2015) Robotic versus laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy for treatment of prolapse of the apical segment of the vagina: a systematic review with meta-analysis. International Urogynecological Journal. ISSN 0937-3462

Full text not available from this repository.

Abstract

Introduction and hypothesis Pelvic organ prolapse shows an increasing prevalence (3–50 %). The gold standard treatment for apical prolapse is sacrocolpopexy, which can be performed via minimal access (conventional laparoscopy or robotic surgery) or open sacrocolpopexy. The objective is to appraise the effectiveness and safety of robotic surgery compared with laparoscopic sacropexy in the treatment of apical prolapse. Methods Keywords were searched in: CINAHL, MEDLINE, CENTRAL, Cochrane MDSG Trials Register, Cochrane Library, Current Controlled Trials, ClinicalTrials.gov, WHO International Trials Registry Platform search portal, LILACS, and Google Scholar. A hand-search was also performed from IUJ and JMIG. Randomised and non-randomised controlled trials evaluating all women who underwent robotic sacropexy (RSC) or laparoscopic sacropexy (LSC) were included. A data extraction tool was used for data collection. RSC was compared with LSC. Narrative analysis and meta-analysis (RevMan) were conducted where appropriate. Results Nine papers compared RSC with LSC, involving 1,157 subjects. No significant difference was found between approaches for anatomical outcomes, mortality, hospital stay (MD: −0.72/95 % CI 1.72, 0.28], p = 0.16), and postoperative quality of life. However, robotic sacropexy had more postoperative pain and longer operating times, although fewer overall complications when performed concomitantly with hysterectomy (OR 0.35; 95 % CI 0.19–0.64). Conclusions Robotic sacropexy was related to more postoperative pain and longer operating times. However, no significant differences were found regarding anatomical outcomes, mortality, hospital stay or postoperative quality of life. Cautious interpretation of results is advised because of the risk of bias caused by the inclusion of non-randomised studies. More research comparing RSC with LSC is mandatory, particularly draw conclusions regarding estimated blood loss and complication rate.

Item Type: Journal Article
Additional Information: Citation: De Sa, M. D. G., Claydon, L. S., Whitlow, B., & Artahona, M. A. D., 2015. Robotic versus laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy for treatment of prolapse of the apical segment of the vagina: a systematic review and meta-analysis. International Urogynecology Journal, pp.1-12..
Faculty: Faculty of Medical Science
Depositing User: Mr I Walker
Date Deposited: 13 Oct 2015 11:26
Last Modified: 24 Oct 2016 09:24
URI: http://arro.anglia.ac.uk/id/eprint/579614

Actions (login required)

Edit Item Edit Item