Robot-Assisted Laparoscopy, Natural Orifice Transluminal Endoscopy, and Single-Site Laparoscopy in Reproductive Surgery

ABSTRACT

Minimally invasive gynecologic surgery is continuously pushing its limits by embracing ever more sophisticated technology. This is also true for reproductive surgery, arguably the birthplace of gynecologic endoscopy, where minimally invasive treatment of uterine, tubal, ovarian, and peritoneal pathology has long become the gold standard. This article describes in some detail three novel minimally invasive surgery approaches that have seen the light during the past decade: robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery, natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery, and single-incision laparoscopic surgery. These fascinating technologies, far from being widely adopted, are sure to generate scientific controversy for years to come. Nonetheless, they follow in the footsteps of the tradition of innovation that is a defining aspect of our specialty and hold the promise to potentially revolutionize the field of reproductive surgery.

KEYWORDS

Robotic surgery - robotics - natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery - NOTES - single-incision laparoscopic surgery - SILS - laparoscopic single-site surgery - LESS - reproductive surgery

REFERENCES

• 1 Isaacson K B. Complications of Gynecologic Endoscopic Surgery. Philadelphia, PA: WB Saunders; 2006
• 2 Nezhat C, Nezhat F, Nezhat C. Nezhat's Operative Gynecologic Laparoscopy and Hysteroscopy. 3rd ed. New York: Cambridge University Press; 2008
• 3 Ketefian A, Hu J, Bartolucci A A, Azziz R. Society of Reproductive Surgeons, Inc . Fifteen-year trend in the use of reproductive surgery in women in the United States.  Fertil Steril. 2009;  92 (2) 727-735
• 4 Advincula A P, Xu X, Goudeau IV S, Ransom S B. Robot-assisted laparoscopic myomectomy versus abdominal myomectomy: a comparison of short-term surgical outcomes and immediate costs.  J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2007;  14 (6) 698-705
• 5 Vlaovic P D, Sargent E R, Boker J R et al. Immediate impact of an intensive one-week laparoscopy training program on laparoscopic skills among postgraduate urologists.  JSLS. 2008;  12 (1) 1-8
• 6 Passerotti C C, Passerotti A M, Dall'Oglio M F et al. Comparing the quality of the suture anastomosis and the learning curves associated with performing open, freehand, and robotic-assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty in a swine animal model.  J Am Coll Surg. 2009;  208 (4) 576-586
• 7 Stefanidis D, Wang F, Korndorffer Jr J R, Dunne J B, Scott D J. Robotic assistance improves intracorporeal suturing performance and safety in the operating room while decreasing operator workload.  Surg Endosc. 2010;  24 (2) 377-382
• 8 Lenihan Jr J P, Kovanda C, Seshadri-Kreaden U. What is the learning curve for robotic assisted gynecologic surgery?.  J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2008;  15 (5) 589-594
• 9 Seamon L G, Fowler J M, Richardson D L et al. A detailed analysis of the learning curve: robotic hysterectomy and pelvic-aortic lymphadenectomy for endometrial cancer.  Gynecol Oncol. 2009;  114 (2) 162-167
• 10 Akl M N, Long J B, Giles D L et al. Robotic-assisted sacrocolpopexy: technique and learning curve.  Surg Endosc. 2009;  23 (10) 2390-2394
• 11 Ahmad G, Watson A, Vandekerckhove P, Lilford R. Techniques for pelvic surgery in subfertility.  Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2006;  (2) CD000221
• 12 Degueldre M, Vandromme J, Huong P T, Cadière G B. Robotically assisted laparoscopic microsurgical tubal reanastomosis: a feasibility study.  Fertil Steril. 2000;  74 (5) 1020-1023
• 13 Rodgers A K, Goldberg J M, Hammel J P, Falcone T. Tubal anastomosis by robotic compared with outpatient minilaparotomy.  Obstet Gynecol. 2007;  109 (6) 1375-1380
• 14 Dharia Patel S P, Steinkampf M P, Whitten S J, Malizia B A. Robotic tubal anastomosis: surgical technique and cost effectiveness.  Fertil Steril. 2008;  90 (4) 1175-1179
• 15 Mais V, Ajossa S, Guerriero S, Mascia M, Solla E, Melis G B. Laparoscopic versus abdominal myomectomy: a prospective, randomized trial to evaluate benefits in early outcome.  Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1996;  174 (2) 654-658
• 16 Seracchioli R, Rossi S, Govoni F et al. Fertility and obstetric outcome after laparoscopic myomectomy of large myomata: a randomized comparison with abdominal myomectomy.  Hum Reprod. 2000;  15 (12) 2663-2668
• 17 Palomba S, Zupi E, Falbo A et al. A multicenter randomized, controlled study comparing laparoscopic versus minilaparotomic myomectomy: reproductive outcomes.  Fertil Steril. 2007;  88 (4) 933-941
• 18 Seracchioli R, Manuzzi L, Vianello F et al. Obstetric and delivery outcome of pregnancies achieved after laparoscopic myomectomy.  Fertil Steril. 2006;  86 (1) 159-165
• 19 Sizzi O, Rossetti A, Malzoni M et al. Italian multicenter study on complications of laparoscopic myomectomy.  J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2007;  14 (4) 453-462
• 20 Liu G, Zolis L, Kung R, Melchior M, Singh S, Cook E F. The laparoscopic myomectomy: a survey of Canadian gynaecologists.  J Obstet Gynaecol Can. 2010;  32 (2) 139-148
• 21 Advincula A P, Song A, Burke W, Reynolds R K. Preliminary experience with robot-assisted laparoscopic myomectomy.  J Am Assoc Gynecol Laparosc. 2004;  11 (4) 511-518
• 22 Koh C, Janik G. Laparoscopic myomectomy: the current status.  Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol. 2003;  15 (4) 295-301
• 23 Bedient C E, Magrina J F, Noble B N, Kho R M. Comparison of robotic and laparoscopic myomectomy.  Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2009;  201 (6) 566 e1-e5
• 24 Greenberg J A, Einarsson J I. The use of bidirectional barbed suture in laparoscopic myomectomy and total laparoscopic hysterectomy.  J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2008;  15 (5) 621-623
• 25 Rackow B W, Arici A. Fibroids and in-vitro fertilization: which comes first?.  Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol. 2005;  17 (3) 225-231
• 26 Moghadam R, Lathi R B, Shahmohamady B et al. Predictive value of magnetic resonance imaging in differentiating between leiomyoma and adenomyosis.  JSLS. 2006;  10 (2) 216-219
• 27 Meredith S M, Sanchez-Ramos L, Kaunitz A M. Diagnostic accuracy of transvaginal sonography for the diagnosis of adenomyosis: systematic review and metaanalysis.  Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2009;  201 (1) 107 e1-e6
• 28 Goto A, Takeuchi S, Sugimura K, Maruo T. Usefulness of Gd-DTPA contrast-enhanced dynamic MRI and serum determination of LDH and its isozymes in the differential diagnosis of leiomyosarcoma from degenerated leiomyoma of the uterus.  Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2002;  12 (4) 354-361
• 29 Nezhat C, Lavie O, Hsu S, Watson J, Barnett O, Lemyre M. Robotic-assisted laparoscopic myomectomy compared with standard laparoscopic myomectomy—a retrospective matched control study.  Fertil Steril. 2009;  91 (2) 556-559
• 30 De Hondt A, Meuleman C, Tomassetti C, Peeraer K, D'Hooghe T M. Endometriosis and assisted reproduction: the role for reproductive surgery?.  Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol. 2006;  18 (4) 374-379
• 31 Coccia M E, Rizzello F, Cammilli F, Bracco G L, Scarselli G. Endometriosis and infertility Surgery and ART: An integrated approach for successful management.  Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2008;  138 (1) 54-59
• 32 Nezhat C, Lewis M, Kotikela S et al. Robotic vs. standard laparoscopy for the treatment of endometriosis.  Fertil Steril. 2010;  94 (7) 2758-2760
• 33 Lee G, Lee T, Dexter D, Klein R, Park A. Methodological infrastructure in surgical ergonomics: a review of tasks, models, and measurement systems.  Surg Innov. 2007;  14 (3) 153-167
• 34 Wiegmann D A, ElBardissi A W, Dearani J A, Daly R C, Sundt III T M. Disruptions in surgical flow and their relationship to surgical errors: an exploratory investigation.  Surgery. 2007;  142 (5) 658-665
• 35 Sutton E, Youssef Y, Meenaghan N et al. Gaze disruptions experienced by the laparoscopic operating surgeon.  Surg Endosc. 2010;  24 (6) 1240-1244
• 36 Park A, Lee G, Seagull F J, Meenaghan N, Dexter D. Patients benefit while surgeons suffer: an impending epidemic.  J Am Coll Surg. 2010;  210 (3) 306-313
• 37 Lee G, Lee T, Dexter D et al. Ergonomic risk associated with assisting in minimally invasive surgery.  Surg Endosc. 2009;  23 (1) 182-188
• 38 Horgan S, Cullen J P, Talamini M A et al. Natural orifice surgery: initial clinical experience.  Surg Endosc. 2009;  23 (7) 1512-1518
• 39 Kalloo A N, Singh V K, Jagannath S B et al. Flexible transgastric peritoneoscopy: a novel approach to diagnostic and therapeutic interventions in the peritoneal cavity.  Gastrointest Endosc. 2004;  60 (1) 114-117
• 40 Rattner D, Kalloo A. ASGE/SAGES Working Group . ASGE/SAGES Working Group on Natural Orifice Translumenal Endoscopic Surgery. October 2005.  Surg Endosc. 2006;  20 (2) 329-333
• 41 Hazey J W, Narula V K, Renton D B et al. Natural-orifice transgastric endoscopic peritoneoscopy in humans: Initial clinical trial.  Surg Endosc. 2008;  22 (1) 16-20
• 42 Steele K, Schweitzer M A, Lyn-Sue J, Kantsevoy S V. Flexible transgastric peritoneoscopy and liver biopsy: a feasibility study in human beings (with videos).  Gastrointest Endosc. 2008;  68 (1) 61-66
• 43 Nezhat C H, Datta M S, Defazio A, Nezhat F, Nezhat C. Natural orifice-assisted laparoscopic appendectomy.  JSLS. 2009;  13 (1) 14-18
• 44 Bergström M, Swain P, Park P O. Measurements of intraperitoneal pressure and the development of a feedback control valve for regulating pressure during flexible transgastric surgery (NOTES).  Gastrointest Endosc. 2007;  66 (1) 174-178
• 45 Suzuki S, Suzuki N, Hattori A, Otake Y, Hashizume M. Telecontrol function of an endoscopic surgical robot with two hands for tele-NOTES surgery.  Stud Health Technol Inform. 2008;  132 511-513
• 46 Thele F, Zygmunt M, Glitsch A, Heidecke C D, Schreiber A. How do gynecologists feel about transvaginal NOTES surgery?.  Endoscopy. 2008;  40 (7) 576-580
• 47 Hernandez J M, Morton C A, Ross S, Albrink M, Rosemurgy A S. Laparoendoscopic single site cholecystectomy: the first 100 patients.  Am Surg. 2009;  75 (8) 681-685 discussion 685-686
• 48 Dutta S. Early experience with single incision laparoscopic surgery: eliminating the scar from abdominal operations.  J Pediatr Surg. 2009;  44 (9) 1741-1745
• 49 Tacchino R M, Greco F, Matera D. Laparoscopic gastric banding without visible scar: a short series with intraumbilical SILS.  Obes Surg. 2010;  20 (2) 236-239
• 50 Rao P P, Bhagwat S M, Rane A, Rao P P. The feasibility of single port laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a pilot study of 20 cases.  HPB (Oxford). 2008;  10 (5) 336-340
• 51 Savaris R F, Cavazzola L T. Ectopic pregnancy: laparoendoscopic single-site surgery—laparoscopic surgery through a single cutaneous incision.  Fertil Steril. 2009;  92 (3) 1170 e5-e7
• 52 Yoon B S, Park H, Seong S J, Park C T, Park S W, Lee K J. Single-port laparoscopic salpingectomy for the surgical treatment of ectopic pregnancy.  J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2010;  17 (1) 26-29
• 53 Fader A N, Escobar P F. Laparoendoscopic single-site surgery (LESS) in gynecologic oncology: technique and initial report.  Gynecol Oncol. 2009;  114 (2) 157-161
• 54 Ostrowitz M B, Eschete D, Zemon H, DeNoto G. Robotic-assisted single-incision right colectomy: early experience.  Int J Med Robot. 2009;  5 (4) 465-470
• 55 Ishikawa N, Arano Y, Shimizu S et al. Single incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) using cross hand technique.  Minim Invasive Ther Allied Technol. 2009;  18 (6) 322-324
• 56 Tacchino R, Greco F, Matera D. Single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy: surgery without a visible scar.  Surg Endosc. 2009;  23 (4) 896-899
• 57 Saber A A, El-Ghazaly T H. Early experience with single-access transumbilical adjustable laparoscopic gastric banding.  Obes Surg. 2009;  19 (10) 1442-1446
• 58 Philipp S R, Miedema B W, Thaler K. Single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy using conventional instruments: early experience in comparison with the gold standard.  J Am Coll Surg. 2009;  209 (5) 632-637
• 59 Chamberlain R S, Sakpal S V. A comprehensive review of single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) and natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (NOTES) techniques for cholecystectomy.  J Gastrointest Surg. 2009;  13 (9) 1733-1740