INTRODUCTIONRobotic-assisted gynaecologic surgery is gaining popularity and it offers the advantages of laparoscopic surgery whilst overcoming the limitations of operative dexterity. We describe our experience with the fi rst 40 cases operated under the GRACES (Gynaecologic Robot- Assisted Cancer and Endoscopic Surgery) programme at the Department of Obstetrics & Gynecology, National University Hospital, Singapore.

MATERIALS AND METHODSA review was performed for the fi rst 40 women who had undergone robotic surgery, analysing patient characteristics, surgical timings and surgery-related complications. All cases were performed utilising the da Vinci® surgical system (Intuitive Surgical, Sunnyvale, CA) with 3 arms and 4 ports. Standardised instrumentation and similar cuff closure techniques were used.

RESULTSSeventeen (56%) were for endometrial cancer and the rest, for benign gynaecological disease. The mean age of the patients was 52.3 years. The average docking time was 11 minutes (SD 0.08). The docking and operative times were analysed in tertiles. Data for patients with endometrial cancer and benign cases were analysed separately. There were 3 cases of complications- cuff dehiscence, bleeding from vaginal cuff and tumour recurrence at vaginal vault.

CONCLUSIONOur caseload has enabled us to replicate the learning curve reported by other centres. We advocate the use of a standard instrument set for the fi rst 20 cases. We propose the following sequence for successful introduction of robot-assisted gynaecologic surgery - basic systems training, followed shortly with a clinical case, and progressive development of clinical competence through a proctoring programme.

Adult ; Aged ; Endometrial Neoplasms ; economics ; surgery ; Female ; Genital Diseases, Female ; economics ; surgery ; Gynecologic Surgical Procedures ; economics ; instrumentation ; methods ; Hospitals, Teaching ; Humans ; Learning ; Middle Aged ; Retrospective Studies ; Robotics ; economics ; instrumentation ; Singapore ; Surgery, Computer-Assisted ; economics ; instrumentation ; methods ; Time Factors ; Treatment Outcome

OBJECTIVE: To compare surgical outcomes and cost of robotic single-site hysterectomy (RSSH) versus robotic multiport hysterectomy (RMPH) in early stage endometrial cancer. METHODS: This is a retrospective case-control study, comparing perioperative outcomes and costs of RSSH and RMPH in early stage endometrial cancer patients. RSSH were matched 1:2 according to age, body mass index, comorbidity, the International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetric (FIGO) stage, type of radical surgery, histologic type, and grading. Mean hospital cost per discharge was calculated summarizing the cost of daily hospital room charges, operating room, cost of supplies and length of hospital stay. RESULTS: A total of 23 women who underwent RSSH were matched with 46 historic controls treated by RMPH in the same institute, with the same surgical team. No significant differences were found in terms of age, histologic type, stage, and grading. Operative time was similar: 102.5 minutes in RMPH and 110 in RSSH (p=0.889). Blood loss was lower in RSSH than in RMPH (respectively, 50 mL vs. 100 mL, p=0.001). Hospital stay was 3 days in RMPH and 2 days in RSSH (p=0.001). No intraoperative complications occurred in both groups. Early postoperative complications were 2.2% in RMPH and 4.3% in RSSH. Overall cost was higher in RMPH than in RSSH (respectively, $7,772.15 vs. $5,181.06). CONCLUSION: Our retrospective study suggests the safety and feasibility of RSSH for staging early endometrial cancer without major differences from the RMPH in terms of surgical outcomes, but with lower hospital costs. Certainly, further studies are eagerly warranted to confirm our findings.
Adult ; Aged ; Aged, 80 and over ; Case-Control Studies ; Endometrial Neoplasms/economics/*surgery ; Female ; Health Care Costs ; Humans ; Hysterectomy/adverse effects/*methods ; Middle Aged ; Postoperative Complications/epidemiology ; Retrospective Studies ; Robotic Surgical Procedures/adverse effects/economics/*methods

OBJECTIVE: To compare surgical outcomes and cost of robotic single-site hysterectomy (RSSH) versus robotic multiport hysterectomy (RMPH) in early stage endometrial cancer. METHODS: This is a retrospective case-control study, comparing perioperative outcomes and costs of RSSH and RMPH in early stage endometrial cancer patients. RSSH were matched 1:2 according to age, body mass index, comorbidity, the International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetric (FIGO) stage, type of radical surgery, histologic type, and grading. Mean hospital cost per discharge was calculated summarizing the cost of daily hospital room charges, operating room, cost of supplies and length of hospital stay. RESULTS: A total of 23 women who underwent RSSH were matched with 46 historic controls treated by RMPH in the same institute, with the same surgical team. No significant differences were found in terms of age, histologic type, stage, and grading. Operative time was similar: 102.5 minutes in RMPH and 110 in RSSH (p=0.889). Blood loss was lower in RSSH than in RMPH (respectively, 50 mL vs. 100 mL, p=0.001). Hospital stay was 3 days in RMPH and 2 days in RSSH (p=0.001). No intraoperative complications occurred in both groups. Early postoperative complications were 2.2% in RMPH and 4.3% in RSSH. Overall cost was higher in RMPH than in RSSH (respectively, $7,772.15 vs. $5,181.06). CONCLUSION: Our retrospective study suggests the safety and feasibility of RSSH for staging early endometrial cancer without major differences from the RMPH in terms of surgical outcomes, but with lower hospital costs. Certainly, further studies are eagerly warranted to confirm our findings.
Adult ; Aged ; Aged, 80 and over ; Case-Control Studies ; Endometrial Neoplasms/economics/*surgery ; Female ; Health Care Costs ; Humans ; Hysterectomy/adverse effects/*methods ; Middle Aged ; Postoperative Complications/epidemiology ; Retrospective Studies ; Robotic Surgical Procedures/adverse effects/economics/*methods