» Articles » PMID: 38217834

Robotic-assisted Surgery for Gynecological Indications in Children and Adolescents: European Multicenter Report

Overview
Journal J Robot Surg
Publisher Springer
Date 2024 Jan 13
PMID 38217834
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Robotic-assisted surgery (RAS) is increasingly adopted in the pediatric population. This retrospective multicenter study aimed to report application of RAS for gynecological indications in pediatric patients. The medical records of all girls with gynecological pathology, operated in 4 different institutions over a 3-year period, were retrospectively collected. Robot docking time, total operative time, length of stay (LOS), requirement time of pain medication, complication rate, conversion rate, and pathology were analyzed. Twenty-three girls, with median age of 12.3 years (range 0.6-17.8) and median weight of 47.2 kg (range 9-73), received the following RAS procedures: ovarian cystectomy for ovarian cyst/mass (n = 10), salpingo-oophorectomy for ovarian complex mass (n = 6), bilateral gonadectomy for Turner syndrome SRY + (n = 1), salpingectomy for fallopian tube lesion (n = 1), paratubal cyst excision (n = 1), Gartner cyst excision (n = 1), paravaginal ganglioneuroma resection (n = 1), fistula closure in urogenital sinus (n = 1), and vaginoplasty using ileal flap in cloaca malformation (n = 1). Median operative time was 144.9 min (range 64-360), and median docking time was 17.3 min (range 7-50). Conversion to open or laparoscopy was not necessary in any case. Median LOS was 2.1 days (range 1-7), and median analgesic requirement was 2.2 days (range 1-6). One patient (4.3%) needed redo-surgery for recurrent Gartner cyst (Clavien 3b). This preliminary experience showed that RAS is safe and feasible for surgical treatment of gynecological pathology in pediatric patients, although no conclusive data are available to confirm its superiority over traditional laparoscopy. Randomized, prospective, comparative studies are needed to identify the gold standard approach for such indication.

Citing Articles

Indocyanine green (ICG) fluorescence technology in pediatric robotic surgery.

Esposito C, Masieri L, Cerulo M, Castagnetti M, Del Conte F, Di Mento C J Robot Surg. 2024; 18(1):209.

PMID: 38727915 PMC: 11087303. DOI: 10.1007/s11701-024-01968-w.

References
1.
Varda B, Wang Y, Chung B, Lee R, Kurtz M, Nelson C . Has the robot caught up? National trends in utilization, perioperative outcomes, and cost for open, laparoscopic, and robotic pediatric pyeloplasty in the United States from 2003 to 2015. J Pediatr Urol. 2018; 14(4):336.e1-336.e8. PMC: 6105565. DOI: 10.1016/j.jpurol.2017.12.010. View

2.
Mucksavage P, Kerbl D, Lee J . The da Vinci(®) Surgical System overcomes innate hand dominance. J Endourol. 2011; 25(8):1385-8. DOI: 10.1089/end.2011.0093. View

3.
Peters C . Laparoscopic and robotic approach to genitourinary anomalies in children. Urol Clin North Am. 2004; 31(3):595-605, xi. DOI: 10.1016/j.ucl.2004.04.022. View

4.
Nakib G, Calcaterra V, Scorletti F, Romano P, Goruppi I, Mencherini S . Robotic assisted surgery in pediatric gynecology: promising innovation in mini invasive surgical procedures. J Pediatr Adolesc Gynecol. 2012; 26(1):e5-7. DOI: 10.1016/j.jpag.2012.09.009. View

5.
Xu D, Gao H, Yu S, Huang G, Lu D, Yang K . Ensuring safety and feasibility for resection of pediatric benign ovarian tumors by single-port robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery using the da Vinci Xi system. Front Surg. 2022; 9:944662. PMC: 9437548. DOI: 10.3389/fsurg.2022.944662. View