Robotic Resection of Adnexal Masses during Pregnancy

Abstract

Objective To characterize the safety and feasibility of robotic adnexal surgery during pregnancy, and to compare surgical and obstetric outcomes for robotic versus laparoscopic treatment of adnexal masses during pregnancy.

Study Design A retrospective cohort study of all cases of robotic resection of adnexal masses in gravid patients performed at our institution between 2006 and 2009 compared with 50 consecutive historic laparoscopic controls performed between 1999 and 2007.

Results During the study period, 19 parturients underwent planned robotic resection of adnexal masses, all of which were uncomplicated. Compared with 50 consecutive laparoscopic controls, no differences in operative time, conversion to laparotomy, intraoperative or postoperative complications, or observed obstetric outcomes were apparent. The robotic cohort had a significantly shorter length of hospital stay (p < 0.01) and estimated blood loss (p = 0.02).

Conclusion Robotic resection of adnexal masses during pregnancy appears both safe and feasible, with similar surgical outcomes when compared with a historic laparoscopic cohort.

Keywords

adnexal mass - robot - robotic surgery - pregnancy

• References

• 1 Lavery JP, Koontz WL, Layman L, Shaw L, Gumpel U. Sonographic evaluation of the adnexa during early pregnancy. Surg Gynecol Obstet 1986; 163: 319-323
• 2 Whitecar MP, Turner S, Higby MK. Adnexal masses in pregnancy: a review of 130 cases undergoing surgical management. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1999; 181: 19-24
• 3 Giuntoli II RL, Vang RS, Bristow RE. Evaluation and management of adnexal masses during pregnancy. Clin Obstet Gynecol 2006; 49: 492-505
• 4 Struyk AP, Treffers PE. Ovarian tumors in pregnancy. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 1984; 63: 421-424
• 5 Balthazar U, Steiner AZ, Boggess JF, Gehrig PA. Management of a persistent adnexal mass in pregnancy: what is the ideal surgical approach?. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 2011; 18: 720-725
• 6 Mathevet P, Nessah K, Dargent D, Mellier G. Laparoscopic management of adnexal masses in pregnancy: a case series. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2003; 108: 217-222
• 7 Yuen PM, NG PS, Leung PL, Rogers MS. Outcome in laparoscopic management of persistent adnexal masses during the second trimester of pregnancy. Surg Endosc 2004; 18: 1354-1357
• 8 Mendivil A, Holloway RW, Boggess JF. Emergence of robotic assisted surgery in gynecologic oncology: American perspective. Gynecol Oncol 2009; 114 (2, Suppl) S24-S31
• 9 Reynolds RK, Advincula AP. Robot-assisted laparoscopic hysterectomy: technique and initial experience. Am J Surg 2006; 191: 555-560
• 10 Advincula AP, Song A, Burke W, Reynolds RK. Preliminary experience with robot-assisted laparoscopic myomectomy. J Am Assoc Gynecol Laparosc 2004; 11: 511-518
• 11 Boggess JF, Gehrig PA, Cantrell L , et al. A case-control study of robot-assisted type III radical hysterectomy with pelvic lymph node dissection compared with open radical hysterectomy. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2008; 199: 357 , e1–e7
• 12 Wolfe L, DePasquale S, Adair CD , et al. Robotic-assisted laparoscopic placement of transabdominal cerclage during pregnancy. Am J Perinatol 2008; 25: 653-655
• 13 Barmat L, Glaser G, Davis G, Craparo F. Da Vinci-assisted abdominal cerclage. Fertil Steril 2007; 88: 1437 , e1–e3
• 14 Aaronson OS, Tulipan NB, Cywes R , et al. Robot-assisted endoscopic intrauterine myelomeningocele repair: a feasibility study. Pediatr Neurosurg 2002; 36: 85-89
• 15 Burke WM, Gossner G, Goldman NA. Robotic surgery in the obese gynecologic patient. Clin Obstet Gynecol 2011; 54: 420-430