Skip to main content

07.01.2019 | Original Article

Robotic sacrocolpopexy: adverse events reported to the FDA over the last decade

verfasst von: Colby Souders, Farnoosh Nik-Ahd, Hanson Zhao, Karyn Eilber, Bilal Chugtai, Jennifer Anger

Erschienen in: International Urogynecology Journal

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Introduction and hypothesis

As surgeons increase the volume of robotic abdominal sacrocolpopexies (rASCs) and become more experienced, a subsequent decrease in the number of adverse events is expected over time. Further, as the leading manufacturer of the operative robot (Intuitive Surgical) improves the technology, adverse events should also decrease. We hypothesized that there has been a decrease in adverse event reporting for rASCs and that serious adverse events are rare.

Methods

We performed a search of the FDA Manufacturer and User Facility Device Experience (MAUDE) database. All entries with the manufacturer “Intuitive Surgical” were exported from 2007 to 2017. All entries with “sacrocolpopexy” were then isolated and analyzed.

Results

The number of adverse events reported for rASC peaked in 2013 and 2014, at 107 and 124 respectively. In 2015 and 2016, the number dropped to 11 and 7 respectively. There were 334 reported adverse events from 2007 to 2017. Five (1.50%) were categorized as death, 33 (9.88%) as injury, and 296 (88.62%) as malfunction. Analysis of the malfunction reports found that 15 out of 296 (5.07%) were converted to open surgery, 4 out of 296 (1.3%) were converted to laparoscopic surgery, 4 out of 296 (1.3%) cases were aborted, and 6 out of 296 (2.03%) malfunctions resulted in patient injury.

Conclusions

Although the MAUDE database has its limitations, it does indicate that the number of adverse events reported for rASC peaked in 2013 and 2014 and has decreased annually since then. This may be due to improved proficiency of the surgeon and surgical team, in addition to improvements in the robot. When malfunctions do occur, they infrequently cause serious injury or have an impact on surgical approach.
Literatur
1.
Zurück zum Zitat Wu JM, Hundley AF, Fulton RG, et al. Forecasting the prevalence of pelvic floor disorders in U.S. women: 2010 to 2050. Obstet Gynecol. 2009;114:1278.CrossRef Wu JM, Hundley AF, Fulton RG, et al. Forecasting the prevalence of pelvic floor disorders in U.S. women: 2010 to 2050. Obstet Gynecol. 2009;114:1278.CrossRef
2.
Zurück zum Zitat Kurkijarvi K, Aaltonen R, Gissler M, et al. Pelvic organ prolapse surgery in Finland from 1987 to 2009: a national register based study. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2017;214:71.CrossRef Kurkijarvi K, Aaltonen R, Gissler M, et al. Pelvic organ prolapse surgery in Finland from 1987 to 2009: a national register based study. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2017;214:71.CrossRef
3.
Zurück zum Zitat Nygaard IE, McCreery R, Brubaker L, et al. Abdominal sacrocolpopexy: a comprehensive review. Obstet Gynecol. 2004;104:805.CrossRef Nygaard IE, McCreery R, Brubaker L, et al. Abdominal sacrocolpopexy: a comprehensive review. Obstet Gynecol. 2004;104:805.CrossRef
4.
Zurück zum Zitat Hudson CO, Northington GM, Lyles RH, et al. Outcomes of robotic Sacrocolpopexy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Female Pelvic Med Reconstruct Surg. 2014;20:252.CrossRef Hudson CO, Northington GM, Lyles RH, et al. Outcomes of robotic Sacrocolpopexy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Female Pelvic Med Reconstruct Surg. 2014;20:252.CrossRef
5.
Zurück zum Zitat Anger JT, Mueller ER, Tarnay C, et al. Robotic compared with laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol. 2014;123:5.CrossRef Anger JT, Mueller ER, Tarnay C, et al. Robotic compared with laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol. 2014;123:5.CrossRef
9.
Zurück zum Zitat Andonian S, Okeke Z, Okeke DA, et al. Device failures associated with patient injuries during robot-assisted laparoscopic surgeries: a comprehensive review of FDA MAUDE database. Can J Urol. 2008;15:3912.PubMed Andonian S, Okeke Z, Okeke DA, et al. Device failures associated with patient injuries during robot-assisted laparoscopic surgeries: a comprehensive review of FDA MAUDE database. Can J Urol. 2008;15:3912.PubMed
10.
Zurück zum Zitat Friedman DCW, Lendvay TS, Hannaford B. Instrument failures for the da Vinci Surgical system: a Food and Drug Administration MAUDE database study. Surg Endosc. 2013;27:1503.CrossRef Friedman DCW, Lendvay TS, Hannaford B. Instrument failures for the da Vinci Surgical system: a Food and Drug Administration MAUDE database study. Surg Endosc. 2013;27:1503.CrossRef
11.
Zurück zum Zitat Sandberg JM, Gray I, Pearlman A, et al. An evaluation of the manufacturer and user facility device experience database that inspired the United States Food and Drug Administration’s reclassification of transvaginal mesh. Investigat Clin Urol. 2018;59:126.CrossRef Sandberg JM, Gray I, Pearlman A, et al. An evaluation of the manufacturer and user facility device experience database that inspired the United States Food and Drug Administration’s reclassification of transvaginal mesh. Investigat Clin Urol. 2018;59:126.CrossRef
Metadaten
Titel
Robotic sacrocolpopexy: adverse events reported to the FDA over the last decade
verfasst von
Colby Souders
Farnoosh Nik-Ahd
Hanson Zhao
Karyn Eilber
Bilal Chugtai
Jennifer Anger
Publikationsdatum
07.01.2019
Verlag
Springer International Publishing
Erschienen in
International Urogynecology Journal
Print ISSN: 0937-3462
Elektronische ISSN: 1433-3023
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-018-3845-6

Update Gynäkologie

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert – ganz bequem per eMail.