International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2016
Risk factors for robotic gynecologic procedures requiring conversion to other surgical procedures.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Unger Cecile A, Lachiewicz Mark P, Ridgeway Beri
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To determine the incidence of, and risk factors for, conversion from robotic gynecologic procedures to other procedure types.
METHODS: A retrospective cohort study included data from women who underwent any robotic gynecologic procedures between January 1, 2011 and December 31, 2012 at a tertiary care referral center in the USA. Demographic data, perioperative data, and surgeon experience (monthly case volume) data were retrieved; potential risk factors were compared between robotic procedures that were converted to other procedures and those completed as robotic procedures.
RESULTS: There were 942 robotic procedures during the study period. Conversion from robotic to any other type of procedure was recorded for 47 (5.0%, 95% confidence interval 3.8-6.6) procedures and robotic-to-open-surgery conversion occurred in 16 (1.7%, 95% confidence interval 1.0-2.7) procedures. Conversion from robotic surgery to another approach was associated with higher body mass index (P<0.001), previous laparotomy (P=0.042), and surgeons having a lower monthly robotic surgical case volume (P=0.011). Asthma (P=0.008), intra-operative bowel injury (P<0.001), intra-operative vascular injury (P=0.003), and single-port robotic surgery (P=0.034) were associated with increased odds of requiring conversion from robotic procedures.
CONCLUSION: The overall incidence of conversion from robotic surgery to laparotomy was low. Higher body mass index, previous laparotomy, history of asthma, using a single-port approach, and surgeon case volume were associated with the risk of conversion.
METHODS: A retrospective cohort study included data from women who underwent any robotic gynecologic procedures between January 1, 2011 and December 31, 2012 at a tertiary care referral center in the USA. Demographic data, perioperative data, and surgeon experience (monthly case volume) data were retrieved; potential risk factors were compared between robotic procedures that were converted to other procedures and those completed as robotic procedures.
RESULTS: There were 942 robotic procedures during the study period. Conversion from robotic to any other type of procedure was recorded for 47 (5.0%, 95% confidence interval 3.8-6.6) procedures and robotic-to-open-surgery conversion occurred in 16 (1.7%, 95% confidence interval 1.0-2.7) procedures. Conversion from robotic surgery to another approach was associated with higher body mass index (P<0.001), previous laparotomy (P=0.042), and surgeons having a lower monthly robotic surgical case volume (P=0.011). Asthma (P=0.008), intra-operative bowel injury (P<0.001), intra-operative vascular injury (P=0.003), and single-port robotic surgery (P=0.034) were associated with increased odds of requiring conversion from robotic procedures.
CONCLUSION: The overall incidence of conversion from robotic surgery to laparotomy was low. Higher body mass index, previous laparotomy, history of asthma, using a single-port approach, and surgeon case volume were associated with the risk of conversion.