Robot-assisted laparoscopic repair of cesarean scar defect: a systematic review of clinical evidence

被引:7
|
作者
Gkegkes, Ioannis D. [1 ,2 ]
Psomiadou, Victoria [3 ]
Minis, Evelyn [4 ]
Iavazzo, Christos [3 ]
机构
[1] Royal Devon & Exeter NHS Fdn Trust, Dept Colorectal Surg, 17C James House, Exeter EX2 5DS, Devon, England
[2] Athens Colorectal Lab, Athens, Greece
[3] Metaxa Canc Hosp, Gynaecol Oncol Dept, Piraeus, Greece
[4] Rutgers New Jersey Med Sch, Obstet Gynecol & Reprod Hlth, Newark, NJ USA
关键词
Cesarean scar defect; Cesarean section; Cesarean delivery; Robotic; Robotic surgery; Robotic assisted laparoscopy; ECTOPIC PREGNANCY; PLACENTA-ACCRETA; PREVALENCE; MANAGEMENT; SURGERY;
D O I
10.1007/s11701-022-01502-w
中图分类号
R61 [外科手术学];
学科分类号
摘要
We aim to assess the available evidence concerning the robot-assisted repair of cesarean scar defect. A systematic PubMed and Scopus search was conducted. All databases were assessed up to May 23, 2022. Studies reporting data on robot-assisted repair of cesarean scar defect were included in this review. Data of 34 patients are presented. The mean age of the patients was 34.8 years old. The mean number of times a woman has been pregnant (gravidity) was 3.1, while the mean number of parity among the included women was 1.9. The mean number of previous cesarean sections among the included women is 1.8. The commonest symptoms at presentation of cesarean scar defect were vaginal bleeding, dysmenorrhea, abdominal pain, secondary infertility amenorrhea and ectopic cesarean scar pregnancy. The gestational age at time of surgery ranged between 6 and 14 weeks. The mean operative time was 165.2 min, while the reported blood loss during the operation ranged between 0 and 400 ml. Bladder perforation was the only intraoperative complication reported (1 out of 34, 2.9%). No conversion to open was reported. The mean interval between the last cesarean section and the development of cesarean scar defect was 22.8 months. Subsequent pregnancy after robotic assisted repair was reported in 16 out of 34 patients (47.1%). Robot-assisted treatment for cesarean scar defect has acceptable effectiveness and risks. Based on available data, uterus-sparing therapy should be considered in patients with cesarean scar pregnancies or symptomatic cesarean scar defect who wish to preserve their fertility. Finally, the role of a combined robotic and hysteroscopic correction of cesarean scar defect for reducing the blood loss and reducing the following obstetrical complications warrants future research.
引用
收藏
页码:745 / 751
页数:7
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Outcomes of Laparoscopic Cesarean Scar Defect Repair: Retrospective and Observational Study
    Nezhat, Camran
    Zaghi, Benjamin
    Baek, Kelly
    Nezhat, Azadeh
    Nezhat, Farr
    Lindheim, Steven
    Nezhat, Ceana
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL MEDICINE, 2023, 12 (11)
  • [22] Effectiveness of an articulating laparoscopic needle holder for cesarean scar defect repair
    Nobuta, Yuri
    Tsuji, Shunichiro
    Nakamura, Akiko
    Yoneoka, Yutaka
    Ogawa, Chiemi
    Amano, Tsukuru
    Murakami, Takashi
    JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS AND GYNAECOLOGY RESEARCH, 2024, 50 (07) : 1106 - 1110
  • [23] Laparoscopic Repair of Post-Cesarean Uterine Scar Defect Reply
    Donnez, Olivier
    Donnez, Jacques
    Squifflet, Jean
    Marotta, Maria Laura
    JOURNAL OF MINIMALLY INVASIVE GYNECOLOGY, 2013, 20 (04) : 538 - 538
  • [24] Should All Minimal Access Surgery Be Robot-Assisted? A Systematic Review into the Musculoskeletal and Cognitive Demands of Laparoscopic and Robot-Assisted Laparoscopic Surgery
    Abdul Shugaba
    Joel E. Lambert
    Theodoros M. Bampouras
    Helen E. Nuttall
    Christopher J. Gaffney
    Daren A. Subar
    Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery, 2022, 26 : 1520 - 1530
  • [25] Should All Minimal Access Surgery Be Robot-Assisted? A Systematic Review into the Musculoskeletal and Cognitive Demands of Laparoscopic and Robot-Assisted Laparoscopic Surgery
    Shugaba, Abdul
    Lambert, Joel E.
    Bampouras, Theodoros M.
    Nuttall, Helen E.
    Gaffney, Christopher J.
    Subar, Daren A.
    JOURNAL OF GASTROINTESTINAL SURGERY, 2022, 26 (07) : 1520 - 1530
  • [26] Systematic review: robot-assisted versus conventional laparoscopic multiport cholecystectomy
    Jennifer Straatman
    Phil H. Pucher
    Ben C. Knight
    Nick C. Carter
    Michael A. Glaysher
    Stuart J. Mercer
    Gijsbert I. van Boxel
    Journal of Robotic Surgery, 2023, 17 : 1967 - 1977
  • [27] Systematic review: robot-assisted versus conventional laparoscopic multiport cholecystectomy
    Straatman, Jennifer
    Pucher, Phil. H. H.
    Knight, Ben. C. C.
    Carter, Nick. C. C.
    Glaysher, Michael. A. A.
    Mercer, Stuart. J. J.
    van Boxel, Gijsbert. I. I.
    JOURNAL OF ROBOTIC SURGERY, 2023, 17 (05) : 1967 - 1977
  • [28] Transfer of skills between laparoscopic and robot-assisted surgery: a systematic review
    Pietersen, Pia Iben
    Hertz, Peter
    Olsen, Rikke Groth
    Moller, Louise Birch
    Konge, Lars
    Bjerrum, Flemming
    SURGICAL ENDOSCOPY AND OTHER INTERVENTIONAL TECHNIQUES, 2023, 37 (12): : 9030 - 9042
  • [29] Antimicrobial Prophylaxis in Robot-Assisted Laparoscopic Radical Prostatectomy: A Systematic Review
    Falkensammer, Eva
    Erenler, Ece
    Johansen, Truls E. Bjerklund
    Tzelves, Lazaros
    Schneidewind, Laila
    Yuan, Yuhong
    Cai, Tommaso
    Koves, Bela
    Tandogdu, Zafer
    ANTIBIOTICS-BASEL, 2023, 12 (12):
  • [30] Transfer of skills between laparoscopic and robot-assisted surgery: a systematic review
    Pia Iben Pietersen
    Peter Hertz
    Rikke Groth Olsen
    Louise Birch Møller
    Lars Konge
    Flemming Bjerrum
    Surgical Endoscopy, 2023, 37 : 9030 - 9042