Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 31, 2026
Robot-Assisted Laparoscopic Splenectomy In Children: A Case Report with Literature Review
Published on: March 27, 2026
[Double spinofixation laparoscopic versus laparoscopic robot-assisted: Morbidity, anatomical and functional
S Larue1, G Meurette, P A Lehur
1Service d'urologie, clinique urologique, CHU Hôtel-Dieu, 1, place Alexis-Ricordeau, 44000 Nantes, France.
Objective:
The purpose of our study was to compare the morbidity and the short-term anatomical and functional outcome of the double promontofixation according to the surgical access laparoscopic versus laparoscopic robot-assisted.
Methods:
Forty-six patients were operated for anterior and posterior promontofixation with two mesh between March 2008 and February 2010, 19 were robot-assisted (PR) and 27 laparoscopic (PL). All the patients were contacted again by telephone to answer a questionnaire estimating the functional results.
Results:
Both groups (PR vs PL) were comparable in terms of age, score ASA and of surgical histories. There was no difference in terms of hospital stay nor per- and postoperative complications. The mean operating time was significantly more important in the group PR (P=0.049). With a mean follow-up of 10,7±7,8 months (PL) versus 8,8±5,9 months (PR), the anatomical result was good without recurrence in 93,5% of the cases. The rate of recurrence was similar in both groups with three patients who had a cystocele grade 2, two in the group PR and one in the group PL (P=0.411). The urinary and sexual functional results were comparable between both groups with an improvement of the rate of dyspareunia and dysuria. However we observed more postoperative constipation in the group PR (10/19 vs 6/27, P=0.033).
Conclusion:
The robot-assisted laparoscopic promontofixation is a reproducible technique with a morbidity and anatomical and functional results comparable to the laparoscopic way.
