open access
Vol 95, No 2 (2024)
Editorial
Published online: 2023-12-18
Get Citation
Robot-assisted surgery — inevitable evil or precious innovation in the field of urogynecology?
1, 1
Affiliations- Department of Gynecology, Obstetrics and Neonatology, Medical University of Gdansk, Poland
open access
Vol 95, No 2 (2024)
EDITORIAL
Published online: 2023-12-18
Abstract
Not available
Abstract
Not available
Get Citation
About this articleTitle
Robot-assisted surgery — inevitable evil or precious innovation in the field of urogynecology?
Journal
Issue
Article type
Editorial
Pages
81-83
Published online
2023-12-18
Page views
212
Article views/downloads
142
DOI
Pubmed
Bibliographic record
Ginekol Pol 2024;95(2):81-83.
Authors
Magdalena Emilia Grzybowska
Dariusz Wydra
References (16)- Daykan Y, Rotem R, O'Reilly BA. Robot-assisted laparoscopic pelvic floor surgery: Review. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 2023; 91: 102418.
- Giannini A, Russo E, Malacarne E, et al. Role of robotic surgery on pelvic floor reconstruction. Minerva Ginecol. 2019; 71(1): 4–17.
- Jones KA, Shepherd JP, Oliphant SS, et al. Trends in inpatient prolapse procedures in the United States, 1979-2006. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2010; 202(5): 501.e1–501.e7.
- Ng-Stollmann N, Fünfgeld C, Gabriel B, et al. The international discussion and the new regulations concerning transvaginal mesh implants in pelvic organ prolapse surgery. Int Urogynecol J. 2020; 31(10): 1997–2002.
- Szymczak P, Grzybowska ME, Wydra DG. Comparison of laparoscopic techniques for apical organ prolapse repair — a systematic review of the literature. Neurourol Urodyn. 2019; 38(8): 2031–2050.
- Baranowski W, Stangel-Wojcikiewicz K, Grzybowska ME, et al. Urogynecology section of the Polish Society of Gynecologists and Obstetricians guidelines on the management of recurrent pelvic organ prolapse. Ginekol Pol. 2022; 93(2): 173–176.
- Barcz EM. Pelvic organ prolapse surgery. What techniques should be used? Ginekol Pol. 2023; 94(10): 771–772.
- Szymczak P, Wydra DG. A case report of laparoscopic pectopexy in a patient with an ectopic kidney and POP-Q III grade apical prolapse. Ginekol Pol. 2023 [Epub ahead of print].
- Freeman RM, Pantazis K, Thomson A, et al. A randomised controlled trial of abdominal versus laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy for the treatment of post-hysterectomy vaginal vault prolapse: LAS study. Int Urogynecol J. 2013; 24(3): 377–384.
- Chang CL, Chen CH, Chang SJ. Comparing the outcomes and effectiveness of robotic-assisted sacrocolpopexy and laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy in the treatment of pelvic organ prolapse. Int Urogynecol J. 2022; 33(2): 297–308.
- Szymczak P, Wydra DG, Grzybowska ME. Letter to the Editor about "Laparoscopic pectopexy: the learning curve and comparison with laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy". Int Urogynecol J. 2022; 33(9): 2597–2598.
- Szymczak P, Grzybowska ME, Sawicki S, et al. Laparoscopic Pectopexy-CUSUM Learning Curve and Perioperative Complications Analysis. J Clin Med. 2021; 10(5).
- Callewaert G, Bosteels J, Housmans S, et al. Laparoscopic versus robotic-assisted sacrocolpopexy for pelvic organ prolapse: a systematic review. Gynecol Surg. 2016; 13: 115–123.
- Wang R, Hacker MR, Richardson M. Cost-effectiveness of Surgical Treatment Pathways for Prolapse. Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg. 2021; 27(2): e408–e413.
- Collà Ruvolo C, Afonina M, Balestrazzi E, et al. A comparative analysis of the HUGO robot-assisted surgery system and the Da Vinci Xi surgical system for robot-assisted sacrocolpopexy for pelvic organ prolapse treatment. Int J Med Robot. 2023 [Epub ahead of print]: e2587.
- Oh S, Bae N, Cho HW, et al. Learning curves and perioperative outcomes of single-incision robotic sacrocolpopexy on two different da Vinci surgical systems. J Robot Surg. 2023; 17(4): 1457–1462.
