BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology · 2026
Laparoscopic Versus Robot-Assisted Sacrocolpopexy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
СтатьяСистематический обзорМетаанализСравнительное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Ferrari Amerigo, Borrelli Michele, Moretti Giaele, Caretto Marta, Pisacreta Elena, Giannini Andrea, Mannella Paolo, Russo Eleonora, Vizzielli Giuseppe, Campagna Giuseppe, Simoncini Tommaso
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy, safety and perioperative outcomes of robotic-assisted sacrocolpopexy (RASC) versus laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy (LSC) for the surgical management of apical or multicompartment pelvic organ prolapse (POP).
DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies (PROSPERO CRD42025111099), conducted according to PRISMA guidelines.
SETTING: Secondary and tertiary care centres.
POPULATION: Women undergoing sacrocolpopexy for POP.
METHODS: Medical databases (PubMed, Scopus, ISI Web of Science, Embase, Cochrane) were searched from inception to April 2025 for studies comparing RASC versus LSC. Risk-of-bias was assessed using the Cochrane tool for RCTs and Joanna Briggs Institute checklists for observational studies. Data were meta-analysed separately by study design using odds ratios (ORs) and standardised mean differences with 95% confidence intervals (CIs), applying fixed- or random-effects models according to heterogeneity.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Operative time, anatomical outcomes, complications, conversion to laparotomy, recurrence and patient-reported outcomes.
RESULTS: Five RCTs and twenty-four observational studies were included. In RCTs, no significant differences between RASC and LSC in operative time, anatomical outcomes or patient-reported outcomes were found, with similar intraoperative and post-operative complication rates. In observational studies, perioperative outcomes, complications, mesh exposure, readmissions and recurrence were comparable, but RASC ensured lower conversion to laparotomy (OR 0.2, 95% CI 0.1-0.3).
CONCLUSIONS: RASC and LSC provide equivalent anatomical and clinical outcomes with similar morbidity. RASC may be particularly useful in complex or technically demanding cases.
DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies (PROSPERO CRD42025111099), conducted according to PRISMA guidelines.
SETTING: Secondary and tertiary care centres.
POPULATION: Women undergoing sacrocolpopexy for POP.
METHODS: Medical databases (PubMed, Scopus, ISI Web of Science, Embase, Cochrane) were searched from inception to April 2025 for studies comparing RASC versus LSC. Risk-of-bias was assessed using the Cochrane tool for RCTs and Joanna Briggs Institute checklists for observational studies. Data were meta-analysed separately by study design using odds ratios (ORs) and standardised mean differences with 95% confidence intervals (CIs), applying fixed- or random-effects models according to heterogeneity.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Operative time, anatomical outcomes, complications, conversion to laparotomy, recurrence and patient-reported outcomes.
RESULTS: Five RCTs and twenty-four observational studies were included. In RCTs, no significant differences between RASC and LSC in operative time, anatomical outcomes or patient-reported outcomes were found, with similar intraoperative and post-operative complication rates. In observational studies, perioperative outcomes, complications, mesh exposure, readmissions and recurrence were comparable, but RASC ensured lower conversion to laparotomy (OR 0.2, 95% CI 0.1-0.3).
CONCLUSIONS: RASC and LSC provide equivalent anatomical and clinical outcomes with similar morbidity. RASC may be particularly useful in complex or technically demanding cases.