Health Services Research & Development

Veterans Crisis Line Badge
Go to the ORD website
Go to the QUERI website

HSR&D Citation Abstracts

Search | Search by Center | Search by Source | Keywords in Title

Marra AR, Puig-Asensio M, Edmond MB, Schweizer ML, Bender D. Infectious complications of laparoscopic and robotic hysterectomy: a systematic literature review and meta-analysis. International journal of gynecological cancer : official journal of the International Gynecological Cancer Society. 2019 Mar 1; 29(3):518-530.
PubMed logo Search for Abstract from PubMed
(This link leaves the website of VA HSR&D.)


Abstract: OBJECTIVE: We performed a systematic review of the literature and meta-analysis of the infectious complications of hysterectomy, comparing robotic-assisted hysterectomy to conventional laparoscopic-assisted hysterectomy. METHODS: We searched PubMed, CINAHL, CDSR, and EMBASE through July 2018 for studies evaluating robotic-assisted hysterectomy, laparoscopic-assisted hysterectomy, and infectious complications. We employed random-effect models to obtain pooled OR estimates. Heterogeneity was evaluated with I estimation and the Cochran Q statistic. Pooled ORs were calculated separately based on the reason for hysterectomy (eg, benign uterine diseases, endometrial cancer, and cervical cancer). RESULTS: Fifty studies were included in the final review for the meta-analysis with 176?016 patients undergoing hysterectomy. There was no statistically significant difference in the number of infectious complication events between robotic-assisted hysterectomy and laparoscopic-assisted hysterectomy (pooled OR 0.97; 95 % CI 0.74 to 1.28). When we performed a stratified analysis, similar results were found with no statistically significant difference in infectious complications comparing robotic-assisted hysterectomy to laparoscopic-assisted hysterectomy among patients with benign uterine disease (pooled OR 1.10; 95 % CI 0.70 to 1.73), endometrial cancer (pooled OR 0.97; 95 % CI 0.55 to 1.73), or cervical cancer (pooled OR 1.09; 95 % CI 0.60 to 1.97). CONCLUSION: In our meta-analysis the rate of infectious complications associated with robotic-assisted hysterectomy was no different than that associated with conventional laparoscopic-assisted hysterectomy.