• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

微创顶端骶骨固定术:腹腔镜和机器人手术室经验的回顾性分析

Minimally invasive apical sacropexy: a retrospective review of laparoscopic and robotic operating room experiences.

作者信息

Pulliam Samantha J, Weinstein Milena M, Wakamatsu May M

机构信息

Department of Vincent Gynecology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.

出版信息

Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg. 2012 Mar-Apr;18(2):122-6. doi: 10.1097/SPV.0b013e31824a3995.

DOI:10.1097/SPV.0b013e31824a3995
PMID:22453324
Abstract

OBJECTIVES

Minimally invasive apical sacropexies (MI-APSC) can be performed using robotics or laparoscopy. We hypothesized that operative characteristics of MI-APSC, laparoscopic (LSC) and robotic (RSC), were similar. The objective of our study was to compare operative characteristics, objective prolapse outcomes, and robotic learning curve.

METHODS

Ninety-two women planning MI-APSC for treatment of apical pelvic organ prolapse from 2006 to 2010 were included in the study. The primary outcome was operative time. The secondary outcomes included estimated blood loss, rate of conversion, intraoperative complications, hospital stay, and objective prolapse outcome. We also analyzed the robotic learning curve. Statistical analysis included independent samples t test, Wilcoxon rank sum test, χ, and multiple logistic regressions; significance was set at P < 0.05. Learning curve was graphed with moving average and analyzed with moving block technique.

RESULTS

Forty-eight RSCs and 43 LSCs were analyzed. Mean operative times were LSC, 238 ± 59 minutes; and RSC, 242 ± 54 minutes. Robotic MI-APSC setup was longer (P = 0.02). Complications, conversions, estimated blood loss and hospital stay were low and similar between groups. Patients' characteristics were similar. Concomitant procedures produced longer operative times.

CONCLUSIONS

Operating room experiences with laparoscopic- and robotic-assisted approaches to MI-APSC were similar, but setup time is longer for the robotic-assisted approach. The robotic learning curve is short for surgeons who have experience with LSC.

摘要

目的

微创经骶骨固定术(MI - APSC)可通过机器人手术或腹腔镜手术进行。我们假设MI - APSC的腹腔镜手术(LSC)和机器人手术(RSC)的手术特征相似。本研究的目的是比较手术特征、客观脱垂结局以及机器人手术的学习曲线。

方法

纳入2006年至2010年间计划行MI - APSC治疗盆腔器官顶端脱垂的92名女性。主要结局是手术时间。次要结局包括估计失血量、中转率、术中并发症、住院时间以及客观脱垂结局。我们还分析了机器人手术的学习曲线。统计分析包括独立样本t检验、Wilcoxon秩和检验、χ²检验以及多元逻辑回归;显著性设定为P < 0.05。学习曲线采用移动平均值绘制并用移动块技术进行分析。

结果

分析了48例机器人手术和43例腹腔镜手术。腹腔镜手术的平均手术时间为238 ± 59分钟;机器人手术为242 ± 54分钟。机器人辅助的MI - APSC准备时间更长(P = 0.02)。两组之间的并发症、中转率、估计失血量和住院时间均较低且相似。患者特征相似。同期手术会延长手术时间。

结论

腹腔镜辅助和机器人辅助的MI - APSC的手术室经验相似,但机器人辅助方法的准备时间更长。对于有腹腔镜手术经验的外科医生而言,机器人手术的学习曲线较短。

相似文献

1
Minimally invasive apical sacropexy: a retrospective review of laparoscopic and robotic operating room experiences.微创顶端骶骨固定术:腹腔镜和机器人手术室经验的回顾性分析
Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg. 2012 Mar-Apr;18(2):122-6. doi: 10.1097/SPV.0b013e31824a3995.
2
Short-term outcomes of robotic versus conventional laparoscopic sacral colpopexy.机器人辅助与传统腹腔镜骶骨阴道固定术的短期疗效
Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg. 2012 May-Jun;18(3):158-61. doi: 10.1097/SPV.0b013e31824b218d.
3
Implementation of a new procedure: laparoscopic versus robotic sacrocolpopexy.新手术的实施:腹腔镜与机器人骶骨阴道固定术。
Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2013 Jun;287(6):1181-6. doi: 10.1007/s00404-012-2691-x. Epub 2012 Dec 30.
4
[Robotic-assisted surgery in urogynecology--our experience with the first 100 cases: experience from a single institution].[妇科泌尿学中的机器人辅助手术——我们的前100例经验:来自单一机构的经验]
Harefuah. 2014 Aug;153(8):448-52, 499.
5
Laparoscopic and robotic sacropexy: retrospective review of learning curve experiences and follow-up.腹腔镜和机器人骶骨固定术:学习曲线经验及随访的回顾性研究
Ceska Gynekol. 2017 Fall;82(4):261-267.
6
Minimally invasive radical prostatectomy: transition from pure laparoscopic to robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy.微创根治性前列腺切除术:从单纯腹腔镜手术向机器人辅助根治性前列腺切除术的转变。
Arch Esp Urol. 2011 Oct;64(8):823-9.
7
A comparison of total laparoscopic hysterectomy to robotically assisted hysterectomy: surgical outcomes in a community practice.全腹腔镜子宫切除术与机器人辅助子宫切除术的比较:社区实践中的手术结果
J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2008 May-Jun;15(3):286-91. doi: 10.1016/j.jmig.2008.01.008. Epub 2008 Mar 6.
8
A direct comparison of robotic assisted versus pure laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: a single institution experience.机器人辅助根治性前列腺切除术与单纯腹腔镜根治性前列腺切除术的直接比较:单机构经验
J Urol. 2007 Aug;178(2):478-82. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2007.03.111. Epub 2007 Jun 11.
9
Robotic versus laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy for treatment of prolapse of the apical segment of the vagina: a systematic review and meta-analysis.机器人辅助与腹腔镜骶骨阴道固定术治疗阴道顶端脱垂:一项系统评价和荟萃分析
Int Urogynecol J. 2016 Mar;27(3):355-66. doi: 10.1007/s00192-015-2763-0. Epub 2015 Aug 7.
10
Robotic-assisted sacrocolpopexy/sacrocervicopexy repair of pelvic organ prolapse: initial experience.机器人辅助经阴道骶骨阴道固定术/骶骨宫颈固定术治疗盆腔器官脱垂:初步经验。
Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2012 Mar;285(3):683-8. doi: 10.1007/s00404-011-2032-5. Epub 2011 Aug 5.

引用本文的文献

1
The Safety of Robot-Assisted Sacrocolpopexy in Pelvic Organ Prolapse Treatment: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.机器人辅助骶骨阴道固定术治疗盆腔器官脱垂的安全性:系统评价与荟萃分析
Int Urogynecol J. 2025 Jul;36(7):1355-1372. doi: 10.1007/s00192-025-06158-2. Epub 2025 Jun 12.
2
Comparison between learning curves of robot-assisted and laparoscopic surgery in gynaecology: a systematic review.妇科机器人辅助手术与腹腔镜手术学习曲线的比较:一项系统综述
Facts Views Vis Obgyn. 2024 Dec;16(4):399-407. doi: 10.52054/FVVO.16.4.047.
3
Robotic and laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy for pelvic organ prolapse: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
机器人辅助和腹腔镜骶骨阴道固定术治疗盆腔器官脱垂:一项系统评价和荟萃分析。
Ann Transl Med. 2021 Mar;9(6):449. doi: 10.21037/atm-20-4347.
4
Systematic review of learning curves in robot-assisted surgery.机器人辅助手术学习曲线的系统评价。
BJS Open. 2020 Feb;4(1):27-44. doi: 10.1002/bjs5.50235. Epub 2019 Nov 29.
5
The impact of fellowship surgical training on operative time and patient morbidity during robotics-assisted sacrocolpopexy.专科 fellowship 手术培训对机器人辅助骶骨阴道固定术中手术时间和患者发病率的影响。
Int Urogynecol J. 2018 Sep;29(9):1317-1323. doi: 10.1007/s00192-017-3468-3. Epub 2017 Sep 9.
6
Standardized surgical technique and dedicated operating room environment can reduce the operative time during robotic-assisted surgery for pelvic floor disorders.标准化的手术技术和专门的手术室环境可以减少机器人辅助盆底疾病手术的手术时间。
J Robot Surg. 2014 Mar;8(1):7-12. doi: 10.1007/s11701-013-0411-6. Epub 2013 Jun 7.
7
Laparoscopic versus open sacrocolpopexy for treatment of prolapse of the apical segment of the vagina: a systematic review and meta-analysis.腹腔镜与开放式骶骨阴道固定术治疗阴道顶端脱垂:一项系统评价和荟萃分析
Int Urogynecol J. 2016 Jan;27(1):3-17. doi: 10.1007/s00192-015-2765-y. Epub 2015 Aug 7.
8
Robotic versus laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy for treatment of prolapse of the apical segment of the vagina: a systematic review and meta-analysis.机器人辅助与腹腔镜骶骨阴道固定术治疗阴道顶端脱垂:一项系统评价和荟萃分析
Int Urogynecol J. 2016 Mar;27(3):355-66. doi: 10.1007/s00192-015-2763-0. Epub 2015 Aug 7.
9
Robotic pelvic organ prolapse surgery.机器人盆腔器官脱垂手术。
Nat Rev Urol. 2015 Apr;12(4):216-24. doi: 10.1038/nrurol.2015.51. Epub 2015 Mar 24.