Robotic pelvic organ prolapse surgery - Abstract

Robotic sacrocolpopexy (RSC) has rapidly gained popularity over the past 10 years, owing to claims that it is associated with a reduced learning curve compared with standard laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy (LSC) and that it has equal efficacy to the gold-standard treatment, abdominal sacrocolpopexy (ASC).

The specifics of the surgical technique used for RSC vary widely, but the basic steps and principles are largely the same. Although complication rates are low, specific complications can be minimized by meticulous attention to surgical technique at several important points in the procedure. Multiple levels of evidence support the efficacy of RSC, and show that it is associated with a shorter hospital stay and convalescence than ASC. The learning curve for RSC usually comprises 10-20 procedures but for those with extensive experience of laparoscopy it is likely to be even shorter. RSC is more expensive than LSC but cheaper than ASC. As RSC has only been used for about a decade, we await long-term outcomes of more than a few years.

Written by:
Sajadi KP, Goldman HB.   Are you the author?
Department of Urology, Oregon Health &Science University, CH10U, 3303 SW Bond Avenue, Portland, OR 97239, USA; Glickman Urological and Kidney Institute, The Cleveland Clinic, Q10-1, 9500 Euclid Avenue, Cleveland, OH 44195, USA.

Reference: Nat Rev Urol. 2015 Apr;12(4):216-224.
doi: 10.1038/nrurol.2015.51


PubMed Abstract
PMID: 25800401

UroToday.com Trauma & Reconstruction Section

email news signup