Cochrane · systematic review · CD011422
Robot‐assisted surgery in gynaecology
Lawrie, TA, Liu, H, Lu, D, et al. · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · 2019 · Cochrane Library
SoF tableOnly the outcomes this review put in its Summary of Findings table are listed (the Cochrane Handbook caps them at about seven per comparison). Its other analyses are not shown here.
Questions
12
current version
GRADE rated
11
No studies
1
Included studies
NR
No studies 1 · 8.3%Ungraded 0 · 0%Very low 5 · 41.7%Low 6 · 50%Moderate 0 · 0%High 0 · 0%
Ungraded means an effect was reported without a GRADE rating; it is not a gap. No studies means the review found nothing to answer the question. The six categories are a display order, not a score.
Questions and results
Current version onlyRobot‐assisted surgery compared with conventional laparoscopic surgery for hysterectomy
Population: women undergoing hysterectomy
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Intraoperative and postoperative complications Robot‐assisted surgery vs conventional laparoscopic surgery | RR 0.92 [0.54, 1.59] | 6 studies · 585 participants | Low |
Intraoperative complications Robot‐assisted surgery vs conventional laparoscopic surgery | RR 1.05 [0.31, 3.56] | 5 studies · 487 participants | Low |
Postoperative complications Robot‐assisted surgery vs conventional laparoscopic surgery | RR 0.82 [0.42, 1.59] | 5 studies · 533 participants | Low |
Total operating time Robot‐assisted surgery vs conventional laparoscopic surgery | no estimate extracted | 2 studies · 148 participants | Very low Downgraded: imprecision, inconsistency |
Overall hospital stay Robot‐assisted surgery vs conventional laparoscopic surgery | no estimate extracted | 2 studies · 192 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Blood transfusions Robot‐assisted surgery vs conventional laparoscopic surgery | RR 2.49 [0.75, 8.23] | 4 studies · 346 participants | Low |
Robot‐assisted surgery compared with conventional laparoscopic surgery for sacrocolpopexy
Population: gynaecology
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Intraoperative and postoperative complications Robot‐assisted surgery vs conventional laparoscopic surgery | RR 0.95 [0.21, 4.24] | 3 studies · 186 participants | Very low Downgraded: imprecision, inconsistency |
Intraoperative complications Robot‐assisted surgery vs conventional laparoscopic surgery | RR 0.82 [0.09, 7.59] | 2 studies · 108 participants | Very low Downgraded: imprecision |
Postoperative complications Robot‐assisted surgery vs conventional laparoscopic surgery | RR 3.54 [1.31, 9.56] | 1 study · 68 participants | Low Downgraded: imprecision |
Total operating time Robot‐assisted surgery vs conventional laparoscopic surgery | no estimate extracted | 3 studies · 186 participants | Low Downgraded: inconsistency |
Overall hospital stay Robot‐assisted surgery vs conventional laparoscopic surgery | no estimate extracted | 2 studies · 108 participants | Very low Downgraded: imprecision |
Blood transfusions Robot‐assisted surgery vs conventional laparoscopic surgery | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Comparison
Population: women with benign gynaecological disease requiring surgery
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Intraoperative and postoperative complications | RR 0.95 [0.46, 1.99] | 6 studies · 513 participants | Low |
Intraoperative complications only | RR 1.71 [0.83, 3.52] | 4 studies · 337 participants | Low |
Postoperative complications only | RR 0.62 [0.3, 1.29] | 3 studies · 315 participants | Very low |
Intraoperative injury | RR 1.23 [0.44, 3.46] | 5 studies · 415 participants | Moderate |
Total operating time (minutes) | MD 41.71 [17.08, 66.33] | 4 studies · 294 participants | Moderate |
Overall hospital stay (days) | no estimate extracted | 2 studies · 217 participants | Low |
Conversion to another approach | RR 1.29 [0.4, 4.16] | 4 studies · 338 participants | Moderate |