Comparison of hysterectomy using four different robotic surgical systems; a retrospective cohort study.

IF 1.9 4区 医学 Q3 ONCOLOGY
Hiroki Nagata, Hiroaki Komatsu, Koji Yamamoto, Masayo Okawa, Kohei Hikino, Yuki Iida, Ikumi Wada, Mayumi Sawada, Shinya Sato, Fuminori Taniguchi
{"title":"Comparison of hysterectomy using four different robotic surgical systems; a retrospective cohort study.","authors":"Hiroki Nagata, Hiroaki Komatsu, Koji Yamamoto, Masayo Okawa, Kohei Hikino, Yuki Iida, Ikumi Wada, Mayumi Sawada, Shinya Sato, Fuminori Taniguchi","doi":"10.1093/jjco/hyaf109","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Robot-assisted surgery has become a cornerstone of minimally invasive gynecologic procedures. While the da Vinci system has long dominated the field, new robotic platforms, such as hinotori™ and Hugo™, have recently been introduced, expanding surgical options. However, no previous study has directly compared surgical outcomes across these four systems. This study aimed to evaluate and compare the perioperative outcomes of four robotic systems-da Vinci X, da Vinci Xi, hinotori™, and Hugo™-in total hysterectomies.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a retrospective analysis of patients who underwent robotic-assisted total hysterectomy at Tottori University Hospital between April 2019 and January 2025. Patients were categorized into four groups based on the robotic system used.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Key surgical parameters, including operative time, blood loss, complication rates, and hospital stay, were analyzed. Subgroup analyses were also performed, including comparisons limited to robot-assisted total laparoscopic hysterectomy without lymphadenectomy and the first 10 cases following the introduction of each system. A total of 293 patients were included. No significant differences were observed among the four systems in terms of operative time, blood loss, or complication rates in the overall cohort analysis or the robot-assisted total laparoscopic hysterectomy subgroups. In the early-case subgroup, Hugo showed a significantly shorter pre-console time, while hinotori demonstrated a significantly shorter console time, both compared to Xi.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Total hysterectomy can be safely and effectively performed using all four robotic platforms.</p>","PeriodicalId":14656,"journal":{"name":"Japanese journal of clinical oncology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Japanese journal of clinical oncology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jjco/hyaf109","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Robot-assisted surgery has become a cornerstone of minimally invasive gynecologic procedures. While the da Vinci system has long dominated the field, new robotic platforms, such as hinotori™ and Hugo™, have recently been introduced, expanding surgical options. However, no previous study has directly compared surgical outcomes across these four systems. This study aimed to evaluate and compare the perioperative outcomes of four robotic systems-da Vinci X, da Vinci Xi, hinotori™, and Hugo™-in total hysterectomies.

Methods: We conducted a retrospective analysis of patients who underwent robotic-assisted total hysterectomy at Tottori University Hospital between April 2019 and January 2025. Patients were categorized into four groups based on the robotic system used.

Results: Key surgical parameters, including operative time, blood loss, complication rates, and hospital stay, were analyzed. Subgroup analyses were also performed, including comparisons limited to robot-assisted total laparoscopic hysterectomy without lymphadenectomy and the first 10 cases following the introduction of each system. A total of 293 patients were included. No significant differences were observed among the four systems in terms of operative time, blood loss, or complication rates in the overall cohort analysis or the robot-assisted total laparoscopic hysterectomy subgroups. In the early-case subgroup, Hugo showed a significantly shorter pre-console time, while hinotori demonstrated a significantly shorter console time, both compared to Xi.

Conclusion: Total hysterectomy can be safely and effectively performed using all four robotic platforms.

四种不同机器人手术系统子宫切除术的比较回顾性队列研究。
背景:机器人辅助手术已经成为微创妇科手术的基石。虽然达芬奇系统长期以来一直主导着该领域,但最近引入了新的机器人平台,如hinotori™和Hugo™,扩大了手术选择。然而,之前没有研究直接比较这四个系统的手术结果。本研究旨在评估和比较四种机器人系统(da Vinci X、da Vinci Xi、hinotori™和Hugo™)在全子宫切除术中的围手术期效果。方法:我们对2019年4月至2025年1月期间在鸟取大学医院接受机器人辅助全子宫切除术的患者进行了回顾性分析。根据使用的机器人系统将患者分为四组。结果:对手术时间、出血量、并发症发生率、住院时间等关键手术参数进行分析。还进行了亚组分析,包括限于机器人辅助的无淋巴结全腹腔镜子宫切除术和引入每种系统后的前10例的比较。共纳入293例患者。在总体队列分析或机器人辅助全腹腔镜子宫切除术亚组中,四种系统在手术时间、出血量或并发症发生率方面没有观察到显著差异。与Xi相比,在早期病例亚组中,Hugo表现出明显更短的控制台前时间,而hinotori表现出明显更短的控制台时间。结论:四种机器人平台均可安全有效地完成全子宫切除术。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.70
自引率
8.30%
发文量
177
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Japanese Journal of Clinical Oncology is a multidisciplinary journal for clinical oncologists which strives to publish high quality manuscripts addressing medical oncology, clinical trials, radiology, surgery, basic research, and palliative care. The journal aims to contribute to the world"s scientific community with special attention to the area of clinical oncology and the Asian region. JJCO publishes various articles types including: ・Original Articles ・Case Reports ・Clinical Trial Notes ・Cancer Genetics Reports ・Epidemiology Notes ・Technical Notes ・Short Communications ・Letters to the Editors ・Solicited Reviews
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信