Robot-assisted abdominal cerclage during pregnancy

Burak Zeybek, Amanda Hill, Gulden Menderes, Mostafa A. Borahay, Masoud Azodi, Gokhan Kilic

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

7 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background and Objectives: Cervical insufficiency is a difficult condition to diagnose and can lead to preterm birth, miscarriage, or perinatal infant morbidity and mortality. We conducted this retrospective case study and literature review to evaluate the safety and efficacy of robot-assisted abdominal cerclage during pregnancy. Methods: We conducted a case series and a systematic review that included patients who underwent robot-assisted abdominal cerclage during pregnancy from January 2010 through March 2016. Results: Six patients met the criteria for the case series. Median age was 34 years (range, 28-37) at the time of the procedure. In 5 cases, the indication for transabdominal cerclage was a failed vaginal cerclage in a previous pregnancy, whereas a scarred and shortened cervix caused by a previous dilatation and curettageinduced cervical laceration was the indication in the remaining case. Median operating time was 159.5 minutes (range, 124-204), and median estimated blood loss was 25 mL (range, 10-25). No surgeries were converted to laparotomies; all patients were discharged on postoperative day 1. The median gestational age at delivery was 37.5 weeks (range, 22-39). Five patients delivered between 36 and 39 weeks. No patients had chorioamnionitis or preterm premature rupture of membranes. One patient went into preterm labor at 22 weeks, and the cerclage was removed via minilaparotomy. Eight articles met the criteria for systematic review. Sixteen patients underwent robot-assisted abdominal cerclage during pregnancy. Median age was 31.5 years (range, 25-37). The major indication in most articles was previous failed transvaginal cerclage. The median gestational ages at time of procedure and delivery were 12 weeks (range, 10-15) and 37 weeks (range, 33-39), respectively. Conclusion: Robot-assisted abdominal cerclage is safe and effective during pregnancy.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Article numbere2016.00072
JournalJournal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons
Volume20
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Oct 1 2016

Fingerprint

Pregnancy
Laparotomy
Gestational Age
Chorioamnionitis
First Labor Stage
Premature Obstetric Labor
Lacerations
Perinatal Mortality
Premature Birth
Infant Mortality
Spontaneous Abortion
Cervix Uteri
Retrospective Studies
Morbidity
Safety

Keywords

  • Abdominal cerclage
  • Cervical insufficiency
  • Preterm birth
  • Robotic

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Surgery

Cite this

Robot-assisted abdominal cerclage during pregnancy. / Zeybek, Burak; Hill, Amanda; Menderes, Gulden; Borahay, Mostafa A.; Azodi, Masoud; Kilic, Gokhan.

In: Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons, Vol. 20, No. 4, e2016.00072, 01.10.2016.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Zeybek, Burak ; Hill, Amanda ; Menderes, Gulden ; Borahay, Mostafa A. ; Azodi, Masoud ; Kilic, Gokhan. / Robot-assisted abdominal cerclage during pregnancy. In: Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons. 2016 ; Vol. 20, No. 4.
@article{9b8382d4574f4e4fbaf67c2904d936fb,
title = "Robot-assisted abdominal cerclage during pregnancy",
abstract = "Background and Objectives: Cervical insufficiency is a difficult condition to diagnose and can lead to preterm birth, miscarriage, or perinatal infant morbidity and mortality. We conducted this retrospective case study and literature review to evaluate the safety and efficacy of robot-assisted abdominal cerclage during pregnancy. Methods: We conducted a case series and a systematic review that included patients who underwent robot-assisted abdominal cerclage during pregnancy from January 2010 through March 2016. Results: Six patients met the criteria for the case series. Median age was 34 years (range, 28-37) at the time of the procedure. In 5 cases, the indication for transabdominal cerclage was a failed vaginal cerclage in a previous pregnancy, whereas a scarred and shortened cervix caused by a previous dilatation and curettageinduced cervical laceration was the indication in the remaining case. Median operating time was 159.5 minutes (range, 124-204), and median estimated blood loss was 25 mL (range, 10-25). No surgeries were converted to laparotomies; all patients were discharged on postoperative day 1. The median gestational age at delivery was 37.5 weeks (range, 22-39). Five patients delivered between 36 and 39 weeks. No patients had chorioamnionitis or preterm premature rupture of membranes. One patient went into preterm labor at 22 weeks, and the cerclage was removed via minilaparotomy. Eight articles met the criteria for systematic review. Sixteen patients underwent robot-assisted abdominal cerclage during pregnancy. Median age was 31.5 years (range, 25-37). The major indication in most articles was previous failed transvaginal cerclage. The median gestational ages at time of procedure and delivery were 12 weeks (range, 10-15) and 37 weeks (range, 33-39), respectively. Conclusion: Robot-assisted abdominal cerclage is safe and effective during pregnancy.",
keywords = "Abdominal cerclage, Cervical insufficiency, Preterm birth, Robotic",
author = "Burak Zeybek and Amanda Hill and Gulden Menderes and Borahay, {Mostafa A.} and Masoud Azodi and Gokhan Kilic",
year = "2016",
month = "10",
day = "1",
doi = "10.4293/JSLS.2016.00072",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "20",
journal = "Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons",
issn = "1086-8089",
publisher = "Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Robot-assisted abdominal cerclage during pregnancy

AU - Zeybek, Burak

AU - Hill, Amanda

AU - Menderes, Gulden

AU - Borahay, Mostafa A.

AU - Azodi, Masoud

AU - Kilic, Gokhan

PY - 2016/10/1

Y1 - 2016/10/1

N2 - Background and Objectives: Cervical insufficiency is a difficult condition to diagnose and can lead to preterm birth, miscarriage, or perinatal infant morbidity and mortality. We conducted this retrospective case study and literature review to evaluate the safety and efficacy of robot-assisted abdominal cerclage during pregnancy. Methods: We conducted a case series and a systematic review that included patients who underwent robot-assisted abdominal cerclage during pregnancy from January 2010 through March 2016. Results: Six patients met the criteria for the case series. Median age was 34 years (range, 28-37) at the time of the procedure. In 5 cases, the indication for transabdominal cerclage was a failed vaginal cerclage in a previous pregnancy, whereas a scarred and shortened cervix caused by a previous dilatation and curettageinduced cervical laceration was the indication in the remaining case. Median operating time was 159.5 minutes (range, 124-204), and median estimated blood loss was 25 mL (range, 10-25). No surgeries were converted to laparotomies; all patients were discharged on postoperative day 1. The median gestational age at delivery was 37.5 weeks (range, 22-39). Five patients delivered between 36 and 39 weeks. No patients had chorioamnionitis or preterm premature rupture of membranes. One patient went into preterm labor at 22 weeks, and the cerclage was removed via minilaparotomy. Eight articles met the criteria for systematic review. Sixteen patients underwent robot-assisted abdominal cerclage during pregnancy. Median age was 31.5 years (range, 25-37). The major indication in most articles was previous failed transvaginal cerclage. The median gestational ages at time of procedure and delivery were 12 weeks (range, 10-15) and 37 weeks (range, 33-39), respectively. Conclusion: Robot-assisted abdominal cerclage is safe and effective during pregnancy.

AB - Background and Objectives: Cervical insufficiency is a difficult condition to diagnose and can lead to preterm birth, miscarriage, or perinatal infant morbidity and mortality. We conducted this retrospective case study and literature review to evaluate the safety and efficacy of robot-assisted abdominal cerclage during pregnancy. Methods: We conducted a case series and a systematic review that included patients who underwent robot-assisted abdominal cerclage during pregnancy from January 2010 through March 2016. Results: Six patients met the criteria for the case series. Median age was 34 years (range, 28-37) at the time of the procedure. In 5 cases, the indication for transabdominal cerclage was a failed vaginal cerclage in a previous pregnancy, whereas a scarred and shortened cervix caused by a previous dilatation and curettageinduced cervical laceration was the indication in the remaining case. Median operating time was 159.5 minutes (range, 124-204), and median estimated blood loss was 25 mL (range, 10-25). No surgeries were converted to laparotomies; all patients were discharged on postoperative day 1. The median gestational age at delivery was 37.5 weeks (range, 22-39). Five patients delivered between 36 and 39 weeks. No patients had chorioamnionitis or preterm premature rupture of membranes. One patient went into preterm labor at 22 weeks, and the cerclage was removed via minilaparotomy. Eight articles met the criteria for systematic review. Sixteen patients underwent robot-assisted abdominal cerclage during pregnancy. Median age was 31.5 years (range, 25-37). The major indication in most articles was previous failed transvaginal cerclage. The median gestational ages at time of procedure and delivery were 12 weeks (range, 10-15) and 37 weeks (range, 33-39), respectively. Conclusion: Robot-assisted abdominal cerclage is safe and effective during pregnancy.

KW - Abdominal cerclage

KW - Cervical insufficiency

KW - Preterm birth

KW - Robotic

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85007405219&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85007405219&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.4293/JSLS.2016.00072

DO - 10.4293/JSLS.2016.00072

M3 - Article

C2 - 27904309

AN - SCOPUS:85007405219

VL - 20

JO - Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons

JF - Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons

SN - 1086-8089

IS - 4

M1 - e2016.00072

ER -