Mosbrucker Cindy, Somani Anita, Dulemba John
Pacific Endometriosis and Pelvic Surgery, 5801 Soundview Dr., Suite 150, Gig Harbor, WA, 98335, USA.
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Riverside Methodist Hospital, 3600 Olentangy River Rd #A, Columbus, OH, 43214, USA.
J Robot Surg. 2018 Mar;12(1):59-66. doi: 10.1007/s11701-017-0686-0. Epub 2017 Mar 2.
The main objective of this study was to compare results of using the robotic 3D/HD scope and the 2D/HD laparoscope for visual detection of histologically confirmed endometriosis. Three surgeons from different practices enrolled premenopausal women ≥18 years who had elected to undergo robotic-assisted endometriosis resection. Patients were randomized to receive 2D/HD laparoscopic visualization either before or after 3D/HD robotic visualization. Resections then proceeded robotically. The number of histologically confirmed lesions overall and by abdomino-pelvic location, appearance and size was compared by scope type used. During the study, 598 lesions were visualized in 98 patients. Average number of lesions per patient using either scope was 6.1. Mean age was 31 years and 77% were disease stage I/II. On histopathology, 58.4% of lesions resected were consistent with endometriosis. All (100%) of these lesions were detected using the robotic 3D/HD scope and 77.9% using the 2D/HD laparoscope (p < 0.001). Compared to laparoscopic, robotic visualization resulted in detection of more confirmed lesions in all anatomic locations and for most appearances, including the cul-de-sac (100 vs. 79%), atypical appearance (100 vs. 71.3%) and width <5 mm (100 vs. 62%), p's < 0.001). Logistic regression indicated that use of the 3D/HD robotic scope was independently associated with 2.36 times the likelihood (95% CI 1.20, 4.66; p = 0.014) of detecting a confirmed lesion, compared to the 2D/HD laparoscope. Large-scale, long-term studies are needed to substantiate these findings in multiple practice settings and to determine whether 3D robotic versus 2D laparoscopic resection has a beneficial impact on symptomatology, recurrence and fertility outcomes.
本研究的主要目的是比较使用机器人三维高清(3D/HD)腹腔镜和二维高清(2D/HD)腹腔镜视觉检测组织学确诊的子宫内膜异位症的结果。来自不同医疗机构的三位外科医生招募了年龄≥18岁、选择接受机器人辅助子宫内膜异位症切除术的绝经前女性。患者被随机分配在3D/HD机器人视觉检查之前或之后接受2D/HD腹腔镜检查。然后通过机器人进行切除手术。根据使用的腹腔镜类型,比较组织学确诊病变的总数以及按腹盆腔位置、外观和大小分类的病变数量。在研究期间,98例患者共发现598个病变。使用任一腹腔镜的患者平均病变数为6.1个。平均年龄为31岁,77%为疾病I/II期。组织病理学检查显示,切除的病变中有58.4%符合子宫内膜异位症。所有这些病变(100%)均通过机器人3D/HD腹腔镜检测到,而通过2D/HD腹腔镜检测到的比例为77.9%(p<0.001)。与腹腔镜检查相比,机器人视觉检查在所有解剖位置以及大多数外观特征的病变检测中,包括直肠子宫陷凹(100%对79%)、非典型外观(100%对71.3%)和宽度<5mm(100%对62%),均检测到更多确诊病变,p值<0.001)。逻辑回归分析表明,与2D/HD腹腔镜相比,使用3D/HD机器人腹腔镜检测到确诊病变的可能性是其2.36倍(95%置信区间1.20, 4.66;p = 0.014)。需要进行大规模、长期研究,以在多种临床环境中证实这些发现,并确定3D机器人手术与2D腹腔镜手术相比,对症状、复发和生育结局是否具有有益影响。