» Articles » PMID: 39124614

Charting Proficiency: The Learning Curve in Robotic Hysterectomy for Large Uteri Exceeding 1000 G

Overview
Journal J Clin Med
Specialty General Medicine
Date 2024 Aug 10
PMID 39124614
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

This study evaluates the safety and surgical outcomes of performing robotic hysterectomy on uteri weighing over 1000 g, with a focus on the surgeon's learning curve. A retrospective analysis was conducted on 44 patients who underwent hysterectomy by a single surgeon from January 2020 to February 2024 using the DaVinci Xi System. Surgical procedures included total hysterectomy with bilateral salpingectomy, and specimens were removed via transvaginal manual morcellation. Operative times were segmented into docking, console, morcellation, and conversion times. Results indicated an inflection point in the 20th case, suggesting proficiency after 20 surgeries. Comparison between early (Group A, cases 1-20) and later cases (Group B, cases 21-44) showed significant reductions in console time (CT) and morcellation time (MT) in Group B, leading to a shorter overall operative time (OT). Although estimated blood loss was higher in Group A, it was not statistically significant. Hemoglobin differences were significantly higher in Group B. No significant differences were observed in transfusion rates, postoperative analgesic usage, or complications between the groups. The study concludes that robotic hysterectomy for large uteri is safe and that surgical proficiency improves significantly after 20 cases, enhancing overall outcomes.

References
1.
Luchristt D, Brown O, Kenton K, Bretschneider C . Trends in operative time and outcomes in minimally invasive hysterectomy from 2008 to 2018. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2020; 224(2):202.e1-202.e12. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajog.2020.08.014. View

2.
Thorarinsson A, Frojd V, Kolby L, Modin A, Lewin R, Elander A . Blood loss and duration of surgery are independent risk factors for complications after breast reconstruction. J Plast Surg Hand Surg. 2017; 51(5):352-357. DOI: 10.1080/2000656X.2016.1272462. View

3.
Lin P, Zheng F, Shin M, Liu X, Oh D, DAttilio D . CUSUM learning curves: what they can and can't tell us. Surg Endosc. 2023; 37(10):7991-7999. PMC: 10520215. DOI: 10.1007/s00464-023-10252-1. View

4.
Yoder L, Elson N, Fellner A, Meister K, Guend H . Residents underestimate their robotic performance: evaluating resident robotic console participation time. J Robot Surg. 2024; 18(1):211. PMC: 11087327. DOI: 10.1007/s11701-023-01790-w. View

5.
Alshowaikh K, Karpinska-Leydier K, Amirthalingam J, Paidi G, Iroshani Jayarathna A, Salibindla D . Surgical and Patient Outcomes of Robotic Versus Conventional Laparoscopic Hysterectomy: A Systematic Review. Cureus. 2021; 13(8):e16828. PMC: 8336353. DOI: 10.7759/cureus.16828. View