Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 5, 2026
Robot-Assisted Laparoscopic Splenectomy In Children: A Case Report with Literature Review
Published on: March 27, 2026
A comparison of total laparoscopic hysterectomy to robotically assisted hysterectomy: surgical outcomes in a
Thomas N Payne1, Francis R Dauterive
1Ochsner Clinic Foundation, Baton Rouge, Louisiana 70809, USA. tnpayne@hotmail.com
Study Objective:
To compare gynecologic practice and perioperative outcomes of patients undergoing total laparoscopic hysterectomy and robotic hysterectomy before and after implementation of a robotics program.
Design:
A retrospective chart review of the last 200 consecutive hysterectomy cases completed before and after implementation of a robotics program (Canadian Task Force classification III).
Setting:
Community hospital.
Patients:
All patients requiring hysterectomy for benign indications between November 2004 and January 2007.
Interventions:
Patients were candidates for total laparoscopic, abdominal, or vaginal hysterectomy before February 2006 and were candidates for total laparoscopic, total abdominal, total vaginal, or robotic-assisted laparoscopic hysterectomy after February 2006. Perioperative characteristics and trends were studied.
Measurements And Main Results:
In all, 100 patients intended to be treated by laparoscopic hysterectomy before the implementation of a robotics program were compared with 100 patients treated by robotic hysterectomy after robot implementation. Overall the robotic cohort experienced longer operative times by an average of 27 minutes. The prerobotic cohort, however, when compared with the last 25 robotic cases had longer operative times (92.4 minutes [29.2], 95% CI 46.0-225.0 vs 78.7 minutes [29.5], 95% CI 66.0-91.2, p = .03). The mean blood loss in the prerobotic cohort was twice that of the robotic cohort (113 mL [85.9], 95% CI 95.9-130.1 vs 61.1 mL [60.9], 95% CI 48.9-73.2, p <.0001) and the mean length of hospital stay was half a day longer in the prerobotic cohort than in the robotic cohort (1.6 days [1.4], 95% CI 1.3-1.9 vs 1.1 days [0.7], 95% CI 1.0-1.3, p <.007). The incidence of adverse events was the same in both groups. The total number of exploratory laparotomies in the prerobotic cohort was significantly greater than in the robotic group (11% vs 0%). The rate of intraoperative conversions to total abdominal hysterectomy from laparoscopy was approximately 2-fold higher in the prerobotic cohort as compared with the robotic cohort (9% vs 4%).
Conclusion:
A higher likelihood of exploratory laparotomy for hysterectomy in the prerobotic cohort versus the robotic cohort and a higher likelihood of intraoperative conversion to laparotomy with the prerobotic cohort than with the robotic cohort existed. Reduced operative time, reduced blood loss, and shortened length of stay may be achieved in patients who are treated robotically versus a nonrobotic approach. Robotics may facilitate the minimally invasive treatment of patients while potentially reducing the rate of abdominal hysterectomies.
