妇科机器人辅助手术与腹腔镜手术学习曲线的比较:系统综述。

IF 1.7 Q3 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY
D Raimondo, A Raffone, D Neola, L de Landsheere, R A de Leeuw, L Mereu, T Badotti, E Pazzaglia, R Seracchioli, G Scambia, F Fanfani
{"title":"妇科机器人辅助手术与腹腔镜手术学习曲线的比较:系统综述。","authors":"D Raimondo, A Raffone, D Neola, L de Landsheere, R A de Leeuw, L Mereu, T Badotti, E Pazzaglia, R Seracchioli, G Scambia, F Fanfani","doi":"10.52054/FVVO.16.4.047","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The advantages and disadvantages of Robotic Laparoscopic Surgery (RLS) compared to other minimally invasive surgical approaches are debated in the literature.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To evaluate the learning curves (LC) and their assessment methods for Robotic Laparoscopic Surgery (RLS) and Laparoscopic Surgery (LPS) in gynaecologic procedures.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>A systematic review of the literature was performed including the English language observational or interventional studies reporting the absolute number of procedures needed to achieve competency in RLS and LPS gynaecologic procedures, along with an objective and reproducible LC assessment method.</p><p><strong>Main outcome measures: </strong>Number of procedures needed to achieve competency in RLS and LPS and LC assessment methods were extracted from included studies.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Six studies with a total of 545 women were included. Several surgical procedures and methods for LC assessment were assessed in the included studies. For radical hysterectomy, bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy and lymph node dissection, the minimum number of procedures required to reach the LC was smaller in RLS than LPS in two studies out of four. For sacrocolpopexy, the number of procedures required to reach the LC was lower in RLS and LPS in one study out of two.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>RLS learning curve was reported to be quicker than that of LPS for radical hysterectomy, bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy and lymph node dissection. However, a standardised and widely accepted method for LC assessment in endoscopic surgery is needed, as well as further randomised clinical trials, especially involving inexperienced surgeons.</p><p><strong>What is new?: </strong>This study may be the first systematic review to evaluate the LCs and their assessment methods for RLS and LPS in gynaecologic procedures.</p>","PeriodicalId":46400,"journal":{"name":"Facts Views and Vision in ObGyn","volume":"16 4","pages":"399-407"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison between learning curves of robot-assisted and laparoscopic surgery in gynaecology: a systematic review.\",\"authors\":\"D Raimondo, A Raffone, D Neola, L de Landsheere, R A de Leeuw, L Mereu, T Badotti, E Pazzaglia, R Seracchioli, G Scambia, F Fanfani\",\"doi\":\"10.52054/FVVO.16.4.047\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The advantages and disadvantages of Robotic Laparoscopic Surgery (RLS) compared to other minimally invasive surgical approaches are debated in the literature.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To evaluate the learning curves (LC) and their assessment methods for Robotic Laparoscopic Surgery (RLS) and Laparoscopic Surgery (LPS) in gynaecologic procedures.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>A systematic review of the literature was performed including the English language observational or interventional studies reporting the absolute number of procedures needed to achieve competency in RLS and LPS gynaecologic procedures, along with an objective and reproducible LC assessment method.</p><p><strong>Main outcome measures: </strong>Number of procedures needed to achieve competency in RLS and LPS and LC assessment methods were extracted from included studies.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Six studies with a total of 545 women were included. Several surgical procedures and methods for LC assessment were assessed in the included studies. For radical hysterectomy, bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy and lymph node dissection, the minimum number of procedures required to reach the LC was smaller in RLS than LPS in two studies out of four. For sacrocolpopexy, the number of procedures required to reach the LC was lower in RLS and LPS in one study out of two.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>RLS learning curve was reported to be quicker than that of LPS for radical hysterectomy, bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy and lymph node dissection. However, a standardised and widely accepted method for LC assessment in endoscopic surgery is needed, as well as further randomised clinical trials, especially involving inexperienced surgeons.</p><p><strong>What is new?: </strong>This study may be the first systematic review to evaluate the LCs and their assessment methods for RLS and LPS in gynaecologic procedures.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":46400,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Facts Views and Vision in ObGyn\",\"volume\":\"16 4\",\"pages\":\"399-407\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Facts Views and Vision in ObGyn\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.52054/FVVO.16.4.047\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Facts Views and Vision in ObGyn","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.52054/FVVO.16.4.047","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:与其他微创手术方式相比,机器人腹腔镜手术(RLS)的优点和缺点在文献中有争议。目的:探讨机器人腹腔镜手术(RLS)和腹腔镜手术(LPS)在妇科手术中的学习曲线(LC)及其评估方法。材料和方法:对文献进行了系统回顾,包括英语观察性或干预性研究,报告了在RLS和LPS妇科手术中达到能力所需的绝对数量,以及客观和可重复的LC评估方法。主要结果测量:从纳入的研究中提取RLS、LPS和LC评估方法中达到能力所需的程序数。结果:6项研究共纳入545名女性。在纳入的研究中评估了几种用于LC评估的外科手术程序和方法。对于根治性子宫切除术、双侧输卵管-卵巢切除术和淋巴结清扫,在四项研究中有两项研究中,RLS患者到达LC所需的最小手术次数少于LPS患者。对于骶colpop固定术,两项研究中有一项显示,RLS和LPS达到LC所需的手术次数较低。结论:在根治性子宫切除术、双侧输卵管卵巢切除术和淋巴结清扫术中,RLS的学习曲线比LPS更快。然而,内窥镜手术中LC评估需要一种标准化且被广泛接受的方法,以及进一步的随机临床试验,特别是涉及没有经验的外科医生。有什么新鲜事吗?本研究可能是第一个评价妇科手术中RLS和LPS的lc及其评估方法的系统综述。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comparison between learning curves of robot-assisted and laparoscopic surgery in gynaecology: a systematic review.

Background: The advantages and disadvantages of Robotic Laparoscopic Surgery (RLS) compared to other minimally invasive surgical approaches are debated in the literature.

Objective: To evaluate the learning curves (LC) and their assessment methods for Robotic Laparoscopic Surgery (RLS) and Laparoscopic Surgery (LPS) in gynaecologic procedures.

Materials and methods: A systematic review of the literature was performed including the English language observational or interventional studies reporting the absolute number of procedures needed to achieve competency in RLS and LPS gynaecologic procedures, along with an objective and reproducible LC assessment method.

Main outcome measures: Number of procedures needed to achieve competency in RLS and LPS and LC assessment methods were extracted from included studies.

Results: Six studies with a total of 545 women were included. Several surgical procedures and methods for LC assessment were assessed in the included studies. For radical hysterectomy, bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy and lymph node dissection, the minimum number of procedures required to reach the LC was smaller in RLS than LPS in two studies out of four. For sacrocolpopexy, the number of procedures required to reach the LC was lower in RLS and LPS in one study out of two.

Conclusion: RLS learning curve was reported to be quicker than that of LPS for radical hysterectomy, bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy and lymph node dissection. However, a standardised and widely accepted method for LC assessment in endoscopic surgery is needed, as well as further randomised clinical trials, especially involving inexperienced surgeons.

What is new?: This study may be the first systematic review to evaluate the LCs and their assessment methods for RLS and LPS in gynaecologic procedures.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Facts Views and Vision in ObGyn
Facts Views and Vision in ObGyn OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY-
自引率
15.00%
发文量
59
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信