Suppr超能文献

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

Comparison between learning curves of robot-assisted and laparoscopic surgery in gynaecology: a systematic review.

作者信息

Raimondo D, Raffone A, Neola D, de Landsheere L, de Leeuw R A, Mereu L, Badotti T, Pazzaglia E, Seracchioli R, Scambia G, Fanfani F

出版信息

Facts Views Vis Obgyn. 2024 Dec;16(4):399-407. doi: 10.52054/FVVO.16.4.047.

Abstract

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.

摘要

背景

与其他微创手术方法相比,机器人腹腔镜手术(RLS)的优缺点在文献中存在争议。

目的

评估机器人腹腔镜手术(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。

材料与方法

对文献进行系统综述,纳入以英文发表的观察性或干预性研究,这些研究报告了在RLS和LPS妇科手术中达到胜任能力所需的手术绝对数量,以及客观且可重复的LC评估方法。

主要观察指标

从纳入研究中提取RLS和LPS达到胜任能力所需的手术数量以及LC评估方法。

结果

纳入六项研究,共545名女性。纳入研究评估了几种手术操作和LC评估方法。在四项研究中的两项中,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术,RLS达到LC所需的最少手术数量比LPS少。在两项研究中的一项中,对于骶骨阴道固定术,RLS和LPS达到LC所需的手术数量更低。

结论

据报道,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术,RLS的学习曲线比LPS更快。然而,在内镜手术中需要一种标准化且被广泛接受的LC评估方法,以及进一步的随机临床试验,尤其是涉及经验不足的外科医生的试验。

新内容是什么?:本研究可能是第一项系统综述,评估RLS和LPS在妇科手术中的学习曲线及其评估方法。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/1c9d/11819794/b129b2e2358a/FVVinObGyn-16-399-g001.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验