부산대학교 도서관

Purpose: To compare perioperative results of laparoscopic and robotic ventral mesh rectopexy for pelvic floor disorders at the beginning of the surgical experience. Methods: Between 2017 and 2022, the first 30 laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexies and the first 30 robotic ventral mesh rectopexies at the beginning of the experience of 2 surgeons were retrospectively analyzed. Perioperative (demographic characteristics, surgical indication, conversion rate, operative time), and postoperative (complications, length of stay, unplanned reintervention) data were compared between groups. Results: Demographic characteristics were similar between groups. Conversion rate was lower (0 vs 17%, p = 0.05), but the operative time was significantly longer (182 [146–290] vs 150 [75–240] minutes, p < 0.0001) during robotic procedure when compared with laparoscopic approach. In terms of learning curve, the number of procedures to obtain the same operative time between the 2 approaches was 15. Postoperative results were similar between groups, in terms of pain (visual analogic scale = 2 [0–8] vs 4 [0–9], p = 0.07), morbidity (17 vs 3%, p = 0.2), and unplanned reintervention (1 vs 0%, p = 0.99). Mean length of stay was significantly reduced after robotic approach when compared with laparoscopic approach (3 [2–10] vs 5 [2–11] days, p < 0.01). Functional results were better after robotic than laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy, with higher satisfaction rate (93 vs 75%, p = 0.05), and reduced recurrence rate (0 vs 14%, p = 0.048). Conclusion: Despite longer operative time at the beginning of the learning curve, robotic ventral mesh rectopexy was associated with similar or better perioperative results than laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]