Surgical Outcomes of Hysterectomy via Robot-assisted versus Traditional Transvaginal Natural Orifice Transluminal Endoscopic Surgery.

Study Objective: To evaluate the safety and feasibility of robot-assisted transvaginal natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (R-vNOTES) hysterectomy when compared with traditional vNOTES (T-vNOTES) hysterectomy.

Design: Retrospective chart review.

Setting: Academic tertiary setting.

Patients: Total of 114 patients with benign gynecologic indication for hysterectomy.

Interventions: T-vNOTES or R-vNOTES hysterectomy performed by a single minimally invasive gynecologic surgeon in the study period.

Measurements And Main Results: The primary outcome of this study was surgical equivalence, measured principally by total operative time between T-vNOTES and R-vNOTES hysterectomy. Secondary operative outcomes that were measured included estimated blood loss, length of hospital stay, reported postoperative pain levels, and number of conversions. A total of 79 women underwent T-vNOTES hysterectomy, and 35 women underwent R-vNOTES hysterectomy without differences in operative time (p = .37), estimated blood loss (p = .27), length of hospital stay (p = .06), or reported postoperative pain levels at weeks 1, 2, and 3 after surgery (p = .78, p = .36, p = .38, respectively). A total of 6 patients underwent conversion in the T-vNOTES hysterectomy group compared with 0 in the R-vNOTES hysterectomy group; however, this was not statistically significantly different, and there were no conversions to laparotomy.

Conclusion: R-vNOTES hysterectomy is a feasible approach to surgery when compared with T-vNOTES hysterectomy and warrants further consideration as a skill set in a gynecologic surgeon's toolbox. Wristed instruments may allow surgeons who are inexperienced in single-site laparoscopy to adopt vNOTES more quickly as a new technique when performing hysterectomy through a comparable minimally invasive approach.