The comparison of 2D and 3D systems in total laparoscopic hysterectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the existing evidence regarding the comparison between 2 and 3D systems in Total Laparoscopic Hysterectomy (TLH) in terms of surgical outcomes. METHODS: A systematic review of electronic databases, including PubMed/MEDLINE and Web of Science, was conducted to identify relevant studies comparing 2D and 3D systems in TLH. The search employed a combination of Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) terms and keywords related to the topic. Studies meeting predefined criteria were included, while case reports and studies not directly comparing 2D and 3D systems were excluded. Two independent reviewers evaluated study eligibility and performed quality assessment. The quantitative synthesis was conducted using meta-analysis techniques. RESULTS: A statistically significant longer operation time in the 2D group compared to the 3D group (7 studies, mean difference [MD]: 13.67, 95% confidence interval [CI] 9.35-18.00, I2 = 16%). However, no statistically significant differences were found between the groups in terms of vaginal cuff closure time (2 studies, MD: 3.22, CI - 6.58-13.02, I2 = 96%), complication rate (7 studies, odds ratio [OD]: 1.74, CI 0.70-4.30, I2 = 0%), blood loss (3 studies, MD: 2.92, CI - 15.44-21.28, I2 = 0%), and Hb drop (3 studies, MD: 0.17, CI - 0.08-0.42, I2 = 1%). CONCLUSION: Our results revealed a significant difference favoring 3D systems in operation time, while clinical outcomes between the two systems were found to be comparable in TLH. However, further research, particularly prospective studies with larger cohorts and longer-term follow-up, along with economic analyses, is needed to provide clinicians and healthcare decision-makers with essential guidance for practice and resource allocation.

Efficacy and safety of V-Loc™ barbed sutures versus conventional suture techniques in gynecological surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: One of the most challenging tasks in laparoscopic gynecological surgeries is suturing. Knotless barbed sutures are intended to enable faster suturing and hemostasis. We carried out a meta-analysis to compare the efficacy and safety of V-Loc™ barbed sutures (VBS) with conventional sutures (CS) in gynecological surgeries. METHODS: We systematically searched PubMed and EMBASE for studies published between 2010 and September 2021 comparing VBS to CS for OB/GYN procedures. All comparative studies were included. Primary analysis and subgroup analyses for the different surgery and suturing types were performed. Primary outcomes were operation time and suture time; secondary outcomes included post-operative complications, surgical site infections, estimated blood loss, length of stay, granulation tissue formation, and surgical difficulty. Results were calculated as weighted mean difference (WMD) or risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) with a random effects model, and a sensitivity analysis for study quality, study size, and outlier results was performed. PROSPERO registration: CRD42022363187. RESULTS: In total, 25 studies involving 4452 women undergoing hysterectomy, myomectomy, or excision of endometrioma. VBS were associated with a reduction in operation time (WMD - 17.08 min; 95% CI - 21.57, - 12.59), suture time (WMD - 5.39 min; 95% CI - 7.06, - 3.71), surgical site infection (RR 0.26; 95% CI 0.09, 0.78), estimated blood loss (WMD - 44.91 ml; 95% CI - 66.01, - 23.81), granulation tissue formation (RR 0.48; 95% CI 0.25, 0.89), and surgical difficulty (WMD - 1.98 VAS score; 95% CI - 2.83, - 1.13). No difference between VBS and CS was found regarding total postoperative complications or length of stay. Many of the outcomes showed high heterogeneity, likely due to the inclusion of different surgery types and comparators. Most results were shown to be robust in the sensitivity analysis except for the reduction in granulation tissue formation. CONCLUSION: This meta-analysis indicates that V-Loc™ barbed sutures are safe and effective in gynecological surgeries as they reduce operation time, suture time, blood loss, infections, and surgical difficulty without increasing post-operative complications or length of stay compared to conventional sutures.

Reloadable Stapler Use during Peripartum Hysterectomy for Placenta Accreta Spectrum: A Novel Surgical Technique and Case Series.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to describe a novel surgical technique for the management of antenatally suspected placenta accreta spectrum (PAS). STUDY DESIGN: This is a retrospective, case series of patients with suspected PAS undergoing peripartum hysterectomy with a reloadable articulating stapler at a tertiary care center. RESULTS: Eighteen patients with antenatally suspected PAS were identified and underwent peripartum hysterectomy with the aid of a reloadable stapler. Mean gestational age at delivery was 344/7 ± 11/7 weeks. Mean total operative time (skin-to-skin) was 117.3 ± 39.3 minutes, and 79.8 ± 19.8 minutes for the hysterectomy. Mean blood loss for the entire case was 1,809 ± 868 mL. Mean blood loss for the hysterectomy was 431 ± 421 mL. Mean units of intraoperative red blood cells transfused was 3 ± 1 units. Mean units of postoperative red blood cells transfused was 1 ± 0.5 units. Five cases were complicated by urological injury (two intentional cystotomies). Four patients were admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) for a mean of ≤24 hours. Mean postoperative LOS was 4.11 ± 1.45 days. Three patients had final pathology that did not demonstrate PAS while four were consistent with accreta, six increta, and five percreta. CONCLUSION: Use of a reloadable articulating stapler device as part of the surgical management of antenatally suspected PAS results in a shorter operative time (117 ± 39 minutes vs. 140-254 minutes previously reported), lower average blood loss (1,809 ± 868 mL vs. 2,500-5,000 mL previously reported) and shorter LOS (4.11 ± 1.45 days vs. 9.8 ± 13.5 days previously reported) compared with traditional cesarean hysterectomy. The reloadable stapling device offers an advantage of more rapidly achieving hemostasis in the surgical management of PAS. KEY POINTS: · PAS is associated with severe maternal morbidity.. · Decreased operative time and blood loss have many clinical benefits.. · Reloadable stapler use for PAS decreases operative time.. · Reloadable stapler use for PAS decreases operative blood loss..

Impact of uterine manipulator on oncological outcome in endometrial cancer surgery.

BACKGROUND: There are limited data available to indicate whether oncological outcomes might be influenced by the uterine manipulator, which is used at the time of hysterectomy for minimally invasive surgery in patients with endometrial cancer. The current evidence derives from retrospective studies with limited sample sizes. Without substantial evidence to support its use, surgeons are required to make decisions about its use based only on their personal choice and surgical experience. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the use of the uterine manipulator on oncological outcomes after minimally invasive surgery, for apparent early-stage endometrial cancer. STUDY DESIGN: We performed a retrospective multicentric study to assess the oncological safety of uterine manipulator use in patients with apparent early-stage endometrial cancer, treated with minimally invasive surgery. The type of manipulator, surgical staging, histology, lymphovascular space invasion, International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics stage, adjuvant treatment, recurrence, and pattern of recurrence were evaluated. The primary objective was to determine the relapse rate. The secondary objective was to determine recurrence-free survival, overall survival, and the pattern of recurrence. RESULTS: A total of 2661 women from 15 centers were included; 1756 patients underwent hysterectomy with a uterine manipulator and 905 without it. Both groups were balanced with respect to histology, tumor grade, myometrial invasion, International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics stage, and adjuvant therapy. The rate of recurrence was 11.69% in the uterine manipulator group and 7.4% in the no-manipulator group (P<.001). The use of the uterine manipulator was associated with a higher risk of recurrence (hazard ratio, 2.31; 95% confidence interval, 1.27-4.20; P=.006). The use of uterine manipulator in uterus-confined endometrial cancer (International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics [FIGO] I-II) was associated with lower disease-free survival (hazard ratio, 1.74; 95% confidence interval, 0.57-0.97; P=.027) and higher risk of death (hazard ratio, 1.74; 95% confidence interval, 1.07-2.83; P=.026). No differences were found regarding the pattern of recurrence between both groups (chi-square statistic, 1.74; P=.63). CONCLUSION: In this study, the use of a uterine manipulator was associated with a worse oncological outcome in patients with uterus-confined endometrial cancer (International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics I-II) who underwent minimally invasive surgery. Prospective trials are essential to confirm these results.

Survival after minimally invasive surgery in early cervical cancer: is the intra-uterine manipulator to blame?

OBJECTIVES: Minimally invasive radical hysterectomy is associated with decreased survival in patients with early cervical cancer. The objective of this study was to determine whether the use of an intra-uterine manipulator at the time of laparoscopic or robotic radical hysterectomy is associated with inferior oncologic outcomes. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was carried out of all patients with cervical cancer (squamous cell carcinoma, adenocarcinoma or adenosquamous carcinoma) International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics 2009 stages IA1 (with positive lymphovascular space invasion) to IIA who underwent minimally invasive radical hysterectomy at two academic centers between January 2007 and December 2017. Treatment, tumor characteristics, and survival data were retrieved from hospital records. RESULTS: A total of 224 patients were identified at the two centers; 115 had surgery with the use of an intra-uterine manipulator while 109 did not; 53 were robotic and 171 were laparoscopic. Median age was 44 years (range 38-54) and median body mass index was 25.8 kg/m2 (range 16.6-51.5). Patients in whom an intra-uterine manipulator was not used at the time of minimally invasive radical hysterectomy were more likely to have residual disease at hysterectomy (p<0.001), positive lymphovascular space invasion (p=0.02), positive margins (p=0.008), and positive lymph node metastasis (p=0.003). Recurrence-free survival at 5 years was 80% in the no intra-uterine manipulator group and 94% in the intra-uterine manipulator group. After controlling for the presence of residual cancer at hysterectomy, tumor size and high-risk pathologic criteria (positive margins, parametria or lymph nodes), the use of an intra-uterine manipulator was no longer significantly associated with worse recurrence-free survival (HR 0.4, 95% CI 0.2 to 1.0, p=0.05). The only factor which was consistently associated with recurrence-free survival was tumor size (HR 2.1, 95% CI 1.5 to 3.0, for every 10 mm increase, p<0.001). CONCLUSION: After controlling for adverse pathological factors, the use of an intra-uterine manipulator in patients with early cervical cancer who underwent minimally invasive radical hysterectomy was not an independent factor associated with rate of recurrence.

Laparoscopic Pectopexy with Burch Colposuspension for Pelvic Prolapse Associated with Stress Urinary Incontinence.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To present a case of pelvic organ prolapse associated with stress urinary incontinence treated by laparoscopic pectopexy followed by Burch colposuspension. DESIGN: Case report. SETTING: University Gynecology Clinic of the Emergency Clinical City Hospital Timișoara, Romania. PATIENTS: We present the case of a 41-year-old woman, gravida 1 para 1, with no notable medical or surgical history, with a body mass index of 40 kg/m2, who presented in our service with heavy menstrual bleeding, dysmenorrhea, pelvic pressure, dyspareunia, stress urinary incontinence, and voiding difficulties. Local examination revealed a cervix descended 2 cm below the hymenal ring, cystocele, urethrocele, and a positive cough stress test. The pelvic prolapse was classified as pelvic organ prolapse quantification stage 3. Ultrasound exam revealed a uterus with diffuse adenomyosis of the posterior uterine wall and normal adnexa. Because of the patient's obesity, the treatment plan was laparoscopic supracervical hysterectomy for the treatment of adenomyosis, laparoscopic pectopexy for the correction of the apical defect, and Burch colposuspension for the cure of stress incontinence. INTERVENTIONS: The patient was placed in the standard dorsal lithotomy position with the hips in extension and the knees flexed and the table in 45° Trendelenburg position. One 10-mm umbilical optical trocar and three 5-mm trocars were used-2 inserted 2 cm above and medial to the anterior superior iliac crests, and the third, 5 cm below the umbilical trocar. The dissection started on the left side of the pelvis. The peritoneum was incised in the center of a V-shaped area bordered by the left round ligament and the obliterated umbilical artery (the medial umbilical ligament). The soft tissue was dissected, and the left iliopectineal ligament (also known as the inguinal ligament of Cooper) was identified right under the external iliac vein and prepared. The same steps were repeated on the right side of the pelvis. The procedure continued with the dissection of the vesicovaginal space. The anterior vaginal wall was exposed with the help of a retractor placed inside the vagina and held by an assistant. A supracervical hysterectomy was performed. An 8 × 15-cm polypropylene mesh, cut in a T shape, was introduced in the abdomen. First, the short arm of the T was fixed on the anterior vaginal wall using multiple absorbable tacks (AbsorbaTack fixation device; Medtronic, Dublin, Ireland). To use a type of nonabsorbable fixation, we decided to also fix the mesh to the cervix stump with 3 isolated stitches (Silk Suture 2-0; Ethicon, Somerville, NJ). Second, with the purpose of ensuring a permanent fixation, the lateral arms of the mesh were attached to the iliopectineal ligaments with multiple nonabsorbable tacks on both sides (ProTack fixation device; Medtronic, Dublin, Ireland). The procedure continued with the complete closure of the peritoneum with VICRYL 2-0 sutures (Ethicon). Because the patient also had stress urinary incontinence, a Burch colposuspension was performed. To expose its limits, the urinary bladder was filled with 200 mL of saline. After the incision of the peritoneum, the avascular space of Retzius was opened. The dissection continued until the Cooper's ligaments were exposed bilaterally. The proper suture placement points on the vaginal wall were facilitated by an assistant's intravaginal finger. Two isolated nonabsorbable silk stitches (Silk Suture 2-0) were placed through the Cooper's ligament and through the anterior vaginal wall on each side. The knots were tied just enough to properly lift the vaginal wall in the normal position, assessed by the assistant by vaginal route, but not too tight to avoid urethral obstruction. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The duration of the surgery was 95 minutes, with minimal blood loss of about 60 mL. The patient recovered well, with the Foley catheter being removed after 12 hours. The patient was discharged after 48 hours. The 6-month follow-up examination revealed a correct anatomical position of the anterior vaginal wall and of the cervix at 6 cm above the hymenal ring and no urinary incontinence. CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic pectopexy represents a new option for the treatment of pelvic organ prolapse. In the case we reported, no intraoperative or postoperative complications were present, and the follow-up assessment revealed an effective correction of the prolapse. Further studies are needed to conclude the efficiency and safety of this new procedure.

Robotic Radical Hysterectomy Is Not Superior to Laparoscopic Radical Hysterectomy in Perioperative Urologic Complications: A Meta-Analysis of 23 Studies.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to compare the risks of intraoperative and postoperative urologic complications after robotic radical hysterectomy (RRH) compared with laparoscopic radical hysterectomy (LRH). DATA SOURCES: We searched Pubmed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library for studies published up to March 2019. Related articles and relevant bibliographies of published studies were also checked. METHODS OF STUDY SELECTION: Two researchers independently performed data extraction. We selected comparative studies that reported perioperative urologic complications. TABULATION, INTEGRATION, AND RESULTS: Twenty-three eligible clinical trials were included in this analysis. When all studies were pooled, the odds ratio for the risk of any urologic complication after RRH compared with LRH was .91 (95% confidence interval [CI], .64-1.28; p = .585). The odds ratios for intraoperative and postoperative complications after RRH versus LRH were .86 (95% CI, .48-1.55; p = .637) and .94 (95% CI, .64-1.38; p = .767), respectively. In a secondary analysis study quality, study location, and the publication year were not associated with intraoperative or postoperative urologic complications. CONCLUSION: Current evidence suggests that RRH is not superior to LRH in terms of perioperative urologic complications.

Laparoendoscopic Single-site Radical Hysterectomy with Vaginal Closure and without Uterine Manipulator for FIGO IB1 Cervical Cancer.

OBJECTIVE: Minimally invasive surgery (MIS) for radical hysterectomy (RH) has been reported with inferior oncologic outcomes in the New England Journal of Medicine [1,2]. Some studies have suggested that the no-touch technique may be a useful procedure to prevent tumor spillage and improve survival. Therefore, we performed RH targeting early-stage cervical cancer using the laparoendoscopic single-site (LESS) approach with an enclosed colpotomy and without a uterine manipulator [3]. DESIGN: Video demonstration of the technique. SETTING: A hospital. INTERVENTIONS: A 48-year-old postmenopausal woman received a diagnosis of stage IB1 (International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics, 2018) cervical cancer [4]. After being fully informed of the benefits and risks of different surgical approaches (laparotomy and MIS), she consented to the MIS. The type C RH through the LESS approach was performed successfully. The final pathologic findings confirmed stage IB1 cervical carcinoma. The patient recovered quickly, albeit with slight pain, and the incision scar was hidden perfectly for cosmetic purposes. CONCLUSION: This video demonstrates that LESS-RH with vaginal closure and without a manipulator is feasible and safe. Suspension skills played a significant role in LESS-RH. In addition, this surgical procedure involved 4 specific techniques to prevent tumor spillage: creation of a vaginal cuff, avoidance of a uterine manipulator, standard type C radical hysterectomy, and bagging of the specimen. These adaptations were meant to minimize tumor manipulation and disruption for reducing the increased risk of recurrence. However, further verifications are still required.

Laparoendoscopic Single-site Radical Hysterectomy: Sufficient Exposure via Effective Suspension.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To perform a radical hysterectomy for early-stage cervical cancer through laparoendoscopic single-site (LESS) approach and demonstrate if the effective suspension could achieve different exposed purposes and space extension. DESIGN: Presentation of the surgery through this technical video. SETTING: Hospital. INTERVENTIONS: A 52-year-old menopausal woman who presented with postcoital bleeding for 3 months was diagnosed with poorly differentiated (G3) cervical squamous cell carcinoma with International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics stage IB1. The patient was carefully consulted about the oncologic risks of the different surgical approaches; thereafter, the LESS approach was decided with informed consent. The LESS procedures for staging surgery were completed. The estimated blood loss was 60 mL, and operation time was 250 minutes. Results of the pathology report showed G3 squamous cell carcinoma and no pelvic lymph nodes metastases. The Foley catheter was removed on the 21st day, and the bladder function recovered completely after removal. She was followed up for a year without any evidence of recurrence or complications. CONCLUSION: Because of technical difficulties with a limited number of hands, complex surgeries, such as radical hysterectomy, have rarely been performed using the LESS approach [1]. The dissection of vesicocervical and parametrial space is critical to radical hysterectomy, and inadequate exposure to these spaces during the procedure presents major difficulties [2]. In the video, surgery for cervical cancer was performed successfully and met the International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics' standards for type C radical hysterectomy. Our video demonstrated that the varied and flexible suspension played a significant role in providing clear vision and sufficient exposure; furthermore, it was feasible, effective, and safe in the LESS approach [3,4].

In Vitro Leakage Testing of Tissue Containment Bags When Subjected to Power Morcellation Forces.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To determine the ability of tissue containment systems to prevent leakage of cancer cell surrogates when subjected to forces encountered during power morcellation procedures. DESIGN: In vitro study. SETTING: Medical device research laboratory. INTERVENTIONS: Samples from 7 different legally marketed tissue containment bags (1 of which is indicated for power morcellation) were subjected to dye and bacteriophage penetration tests at pressures ranging from 0.5 to 50 times the insufflation pressure. The minimum pressure required to cause bag leakage was measured. Subsequently, the morcellation leakage safety factor for each bag was determined as the ratio of the minimum leakage pressure of the bag to the total pressure contributed from insufflation pressure and mechanical forces acting during the power morcellation procedure. MEASUREMENT AND MAIN RESULTS: The leakage performance of the bags varied markedly from brand to brand. No correlation was found between leakage pressure and the bag material or the total bag thickness. The leakage pressures ranged from 26 mmHg to >1293 mmHg for the 7 bags, and safety factors ranged from 1 to 50 when only the insufflation pressure was considered. However, if the morcellation forces were included in the calculation, the safety factor dropped by 6-fold for all brands and dropped below 1, indicating likelihood of leakage, for 2 of the 7 brands. CONCLUSION: This study provides a mechanism for more realistically simulating the conditions experienced by containment bags during morcellation and quantifying the level of safety provided by the bags.

Three-Dimensional Peripheral Bloodstream Model of the Uterus for Laparoscopic Radical Hysterectomy.

Trainees require extensive experience to perform radical hysterectomy. Before starting training during an actual operation, trainees should be familiar with the pelvic anatomy and should simulate surgical procedures. Many simulators are available for virtual reality training of laparoscopic operations, but they are very expensive. The materials required to construct our model included sponges and colored wires sold in home improvement stores that allowed for superior cost effectiveness. The model represented almost all peripheral vessels and nerves around the uterus, including the minor vessels. Attaching and detaching the vessels was easy, facilitating reconstruction of the dissected vessels. The wires were easy to bend, ensuring high operability. This model allows for the simulation of laparoscopic radical hysterectomy in a dry box. Our model was superior to a 2-dimensional picture for the memorization of branching and positional relationships of the blood vessels. Comparison of our model with actual operative videos showed that the dry box provided an identical surgical view of an actual laparoscopic radical hysterectomy. We developed a peripheral bloodstream model of the uterus for repeated simulation of laparoscopic radical hysterectomy with an actual surgical view using a dry box.

Medicolegal Issues in Power Morcellation: Cautionary Rules for Gynecologists to Avoid Unfavorable Outcomes.

Power morcellation in laparoscopic surgery enables specialists to carry out minimally invasive procedures such as hysterectomies and myomectomies by cutting specimens into smaller pieces using a rotating blade and removing pieces through a laparoscope. Unexpected uterine sarcoma treated by surgery involving tumor disruption could be associated with poor prognosis. The current study aims to shed light on power morcellation from a medicolegal perspective: the procedure has resulted in adverse outcomes and litigation, and compensation for plaintiffs, as published in various journals cited in PubMed and MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, and GyneWeb. Considering the claims after the US Food and Drug Administration warnings on morcellation, the current study broadens the scope of research by including search engines, legal databases, and court filings (DeJure, Lexis Nexis, Justia, superior court of New Jersey, and US district court of Minnesota) between 1995 and 2019. Legal records show that courts determine professional responsibility regarding complications, making it essential to document adherence to safety protocols and specific guidelines, when available. Sound medical practices and clearly stated institute best practices result in better patient outcomes and are important when unfavorable clinical outcomes occur; adverse legal decisions can be avoided if there are grounds to prove professional conformity with specific guidelines and the unpredictability of an event.

The use of the V-Care laparoscopic uterine manipulator to facilitate total abdominal hysterectomy: a novel approach and case-series.

Hysterectomy remains mostly performed via the abdominal route in the United Kingdom, despite advances in minimal access techniques and increased training in laparoscopic hysterectomy. The use of uterine manipulators remains a key component of the laparoscopic approach. During abdominal surgery, access to the pelvis can be challenging on occasion, and there may be a higher incidence of intraoperative complications. We describe the use of a laparoscopic uterine manipulator during total abdominal hysterectomy as a novel approach to facilitate the procedure by improving surgical exposure, reducing dissection, while safeguarding vital structures and maintaining vaginal length.Impact StatementWhat is already known on the subject? Hysterectomy remains mostly performed via the abdominal route in the United Kingdom, despite advances in minimal access techniques and increased training in laparoscopic hysterectomy. The use of uterine manipulators remains a key component of the laparoscopic approach.What do the results of this study add? We describe the use of a laparoscopic uterine manipulator during total abdominal hysterectomy as a novel approach to facilitate the procedure by improving surgical exposure, reducing dissection, while safeguarding vital structures and maintaining vaginal length.What are the implications of these findings for clinical practice and/or future research? The proposed technique is safe, easily reproducible and could be widely adopted. This approach may be considered as an option in morbidly obese women or those women with anticipated complex pelvic pathology.

Robot-assisted surgery in gynaecology.

BACKGROUND: This is an updated merged review of two originally separate Cochrane reviews: one on robot-assisted surgery (RAS) for benign gynaecological disease, the other on RAS for gynaecological cancer. RAS is a relatively new innovation in laparoscopic surgery that enables the surgeon to conduct the operation from a computer console, situated away from the surgical table. RAS is already widely used in the United States for hysterectomy and has been shown to be feasible for other gynaecological procedures. However, the clinical effectiveness and safety of RAS compared with conventional laparoscopic surgery (CLS) have not been clearly established and require independent review. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness and safety of RAS in the treatment of women with benign and malignant gynaecological disease. SEARCH METHODS: For this update, we searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE via Ovid, and EMBASE via Ovid, on 8 January 2018. We searched www.ClinicalTrials.gov. on 16 January 2018. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing RAS versus CLS or open surgery in women requiring surgery for gynaecological disease. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed studies for inclusion and risk of bias, and extracted study data and entered them into an Excel spreadsheet. We examined different procedures in separate comparisons and for hysterectomy subgrouped data according to type of disease (non-malignant versus malignant). When more than one study contributed data, we pooled data using random-effects methods in RevMan 5.3. MAIN RESULTS: We included 12 RCTs involving 1016 women. Studies were at moderate to high overall risk of bias, and we downgraded evidence mainly due to concerns about risk of bias in the studies contributing data and imprecision of effect estimates. Procedures performed were hysterectomy (eight studies) and sacrocolpopexy (three studies). In addition, one trial examined surgical treatment for endometriosis, which included resection or hysterectomy. Among studies of women undergoing hysterectomy procedures, two studies involved malignant disease (endometrial cancer); the rest involved non-malignant disease.• RAS versus CLS (hysterectomy)Low-certainty evidence suggests there might be little or no difference in any complication rates between RAS and CLS (risk ratio (RR) 0.92, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.54 to 1.59; participants = 585; studies = 6; I² = 51%), intraoperative complication rates (RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.24 to 2.50; participants = 583; studies = 6; I² = 37%), postoperative complications (RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.48 to 1.34; participants = 629; studies = 6; I² = 44%), and blood transfusions (RR 1.94, 95% CI 0.63 to 5.94; participants = 442; studies = 5; I² = 0%). There was no statistical difference between malignant and non-malignant disease subgroups with regard to complication rates. Only one study reported death within 30 days and no deaths occurred (very low-certainty evidence). Researchers reported no survival outcomes.Mean total operating time was longer on average in the RAS arm than in the CLS arm (mean difference (MD) 41.18 minutes, 95% CI -6.17 to 88.53; participants = 148; studies = 2; I² = 80%; very low-certainty evidence), and the mean length of hospital stay was slightly shorter with RAS than with CLS (MD -0.30 days, 95% CI -0.53 to -0.07; participants = 192; studies = 2; I² = 0%; very low-certainty evidence).• RAS versus CLS (sacrocolpopexy)Very low-certainty evidence suggests little or no difference in rates of any complications between women undergoing sacrocolpopexy by RAS or CLS (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.21 to 4.24; participants = 186; studies = 3; I² = 78%), nor in intraoperative complications (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.09 to 7.59; participants = 108; studies = 2; I² = 47%). Low-certainty evidence on postoperative complications suggests these might be higher with RAS (RR 3.54, 95% CI 1.31 to 9.56; studies = 1; participants = 68). Researchers did not report blood transfusions and deaths up to 30 days.Low-certainty evidence suggests that RAS might be associated with increased operating time (MD 40.53 min, 95% CI 12.06 to 68.99; participants = 186; studies = 3; I² = 73%). Very low-certainty evidence suggests little or no difference between the two techniques in terms of duration of stay (MD 0.26 days, 95% CI -0.15 to 0.67; participants = 108; studies = 2; I² = 0%).• RAS versus open abdominal surgery (hysterectomy)A single study with a total sample size of 20 women was included in this comparison. For most outcomes, the sample size was insufficient to show any possible differences between groups.• RAS versus CLS for endometriosisA single study with data for 73 women was included in this comparison; women with endometriosis underwent procedures ranging from relatively minor endometrial resection through hysterectomy; many of the women included in this study had undergone previous surgery for their condition. For most outcomes, event rates were low, and the sample size was insufficient to detect potential differences between groups. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Evidence on the effectiveness and safety of RAS compared with CLS for non-malignant disease (hysterectomy and sacrocolpopexy) is of low certainty but suggests that surgical complication rates might be comparable. Evidence on the effectiveness and safety of RAS compared with CLS or open surgery for malignant disease is more uncertain because survival data are lacking. RAS is an operator-dependent expensive technology; therefore evaluating the safety of this technology independently will present challenges.

Laparoscopic Radical Hysterectomy with Enclosed Colpotomy and without the Use of Uterine Manipulator for Early-Stage Cervical Cancer.

It was reported recently that minimally invasive radical hysterectomy was associated with worse prognosis than the open abdominal counterpart for the management of early-stage cervical cancer. Uterine manipulator and intracorporeal open colpotomy may be the 2 main suspects responsible for the inferiority. We hypothesize that minimally invasive radical hysterectomy with enclosed colpotomy and without the use of a uterine manipulator will improve survival. Thus, laparoscopic radical hysterectomy with abdominal uterine manipulation and enclosed colpotomy was performed in women with early-stage cervical cancer. The round ligament, the ovary ligament, and the fallopian tube were sutured together for the abdominal manipulation of the uterus. Meanwhile, the upper vagina was ligated before colpotomy to avoid tumor spillage. There were no intraoperative and postoperative complications. The abdominal uterine manipulation and enclosed colpotomy technique, which are both safe and feasible in this study, provide a relatively tumor-free approach for minimally invasive radical hysterectomy. Further investigation of oncologic outcomes in larger prospective studies are needed to confirm our hypothesis.

Strategies to Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Laparoscopic Surgery.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the carbon footprint of various sustainability interventions used for laparoscopic hysterectomy. METHODS: We designed interventions for laparoscopic hysterectomy from approaches that sustainable health care organizations advocate. We used a hybrid environmental life cycle assessment framework to estimate greenhouse gas emissions from the proposed interventions. We conducted the study from September 2015 to December 2016 at the University of Pittsburgh (Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania). RESULTS: The largest carbon footprint savings came from selecting specific anesthetic gases and minimizing the materials used in surgery. Energy-related interventions resulted in a 10% reduction in carbon footprint per case but would result in larger savings for the whole facility. Commonly implemented approaches, such as recycling surgical waste, resulted in less than a 5% reduction in greenhouse gases. CONCLUSIONS: To reduce the environmental emissions of surgeries, health care providers need to implement a combination of approaches, including minimizing materials, moving away from certain heat-trapping anesthetic gases, maximizing instrument reuse or single-use device reprocessing, and reducing off-hour energy use in the operating room. These strategies can reduce the carbon footprint of an average laparoscopic hysterectomy by up to 80%. Recycling alone does very little to reduce environmental footprint. Public Health Implications. Health care services are a major source of environmental emissions and reducing their carbon footprint would improve environmental and human health. Facilities seeking to reduce environmental footprint should take a comprehensive systems approach to find safe and effective interventions and should identify and address policy barriers to implementing more sustainable practices.

Ultrasonic versus monopolar energy-based surgical devices in terms of surgical smoke and lateral thermal damage (ULMOST): a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to compare the degree of surgical smoke or vapor and lateral thermal damage caused by two different energy-based surgical devices (ESDs) used in colpotomy during total laparoscopic hysterectomy. METHODS: Patients undergoing laparoscopic hysterectomy were randomly assigned to an ultrasonic ESD group (n = 20) or monopolar ESD group (n = 20). Colpotomy was performed using the assigned ESD. The degree of surgical smoke or vapor obstructing the laparoscopic view was assessed by two independent reviewers using a 5-point Likert scale, in which a higher score indicates worse visibility. The degree of the lateral thermal damage was measured as the width from the point of instrument application to the margins of the unchanged nearby tissue using a light microscope. RESULTS: The baseline characteristics did not statistically differ between the two groups. The degree of surgical smoke or vapor obstructing vision was 1.2 ± 0.8 points in the ultrasonic group and 3.9 ± 0.7 points in the monopolar groups (p < 0.001). The lateral thermal damage was significantly increased in the monopolar group compared to in the ultrasound group (1500 µm [1200-2500 µm] vs. 950 µm [650-1725 µm], p = 0.037). CONCLUSION: Ultrasonic ESD had better laparoscopic visibility and caused less lateral thermal damage during colpotomy compared to monopolar device.

Intrauterine Manipulator Use During Minimally Invasive Hysterectomy and Risk of Lymphovascular Space Invasion in Endometrial Cancer.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to examine an association between intrauterine manipulator (IUM) use and frequency of lymphovascular space invasion (LVSI) in women with endometrial cancer undergoing minimally invasive hysterectomy. METHODS: A retrospective case-control study was conducted among stage I-IV endometrial cancer patients who underwent hysterectomy between 2008 and 2015. Medical records were reviewed for patient demographics, surgical details, and tumor characteristics. Women who underwent total laparoscopic hysterectomy (TLH) with IUM use were compared with women who underwent total abdominal hysterectomy (TAH). Review of archived medical record for data collection and propensity score matching were performed to adjust for background differences between TLH-IUM and TAH groups. A systematic literature review with pooled analysis was performed to examine frequency of LVSI. RESULTS: There were 687 women who underwent hysterectomy for endometrial cancer. Of those, 419 women underwent TLH with IUM use and 194 women underwent TAH. The most common type of IUM was VCare (89.5%). There was no statistically significant difference in the frequency of LVSI between the 2 groups: 15.1% for TLH-IUM vs 19.9% for TAH (P = 0.14). After propensity score matching, frequencies of LVSI were similar between the 2 groups: 21.2% for TLH-IUM vs 19.6% for TAH (P = 0.78). Systematic literature review identified 1371 cases of TLH-IUM and 1246 cases of TAH performed for endometrial cancer, and frequencies of LVSI were similar between the 2 groups (15.0% vs 13.6%, P = 0.31). CONCLUSION: Our study suggests that IUM use during TLH for endometrial cancer is not associated with increased frequency of LVSI.

Morcellation in gynecologic oncology.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Morcellation of uteri with unsuspected malignancies has been the focus of reports for decades. More intensive evaluation of clinical outcomes and evaluation of impact of changes in practice has occurred since the release of FDA statement advising against the use of power morcellators. The review summarizes some of the most relevant publications on this topic. RECENT FINDINGS: The Society of Gynecologic Oncology and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists concur that symptomatic women should undergo appropriate evaluation, morcellation should not be performed whenever malignancy is suspected or diagnosed, and acknowledge the limitations of diagnostic testing currently available to detect leiomyosarcoma. Accurate incidence of occult leiomyosarcoma in women undergoing hysterectomy for symptomatic myomas is not known because of poor quality of data. Increased complication rates, including death, with abdominal procedures and increased societal costs have been reported. The FDA safety communication has resulted in decreased laparoscopic hysterectomy rates. SUMMARY: Clinical judgement and practice in accordance to clinical guidelines, based on best current scientific evidence, is recommended. Women should be aware of the limitation of current data regarding the incidence of occult leiomyosarcoma or other malignancies whenever consenting to any form of therapy for symptomatic myomas, including surgical, medical and expectant management. If surgical treatment is selected, morcellation should not be performed if a malignancy diagnosis is known or suspected. A minimally invasive surgical approach is associated with a decreased complication rate and an increased quality of life years. Research efforts should focus on improving diagnostic accuracy and efficacy of therapeutic interventions.

Development and history of morcellators.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Controversy exists surrounding extraction of tissue in gynecologic surgery using morcellators following cases of disseminated uterine cancers discovered after the use of electromechanical morcellators. This chapter traces the history of tissue extraction in gynecology and reviews the evolving scientific data and opinions regarding the future of morcellation. RECENT FINDINGS: Since the initial Food and Drug Administration warning about morcellation in 2014, subsequent studies do not support the Food and Drug Administration's high incidence of occult uterine cancer. Current research continues, focusing on methods of contained tissue morcellation, both laparoscopically and vaginally. SUMMARY: Minimally invasive surgical techniques have revolutionized gynecology, drastically reducing the need for open procedures. To maximize patient safety while preserving the rapid recovery and low morbidity of laparoscopic and vaginal approaches, optimal methods of tissue extraction need to be developed and promulgated.