ORIGINAL RESEARCH article
Front. Med.
Sec. Obstetrics and Gynecology
Robotic-assisted surgery in benign gynecology: single-center experience with 106 patients
Provisionally accepted- 1Universitat Bern, Bern, Switzerland
- 2Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Frauenzentrum Bern, Lindenhofspital AG, Bern, Switzerland
- 3Department of Research, Lindenhofgruppe AG, Bern, Switzerland
- 4Universitat Bern Institut fur Biochemie und Molekulare Medizin, Bern, Switzerland
Select one of your emails
You have multiple emails registered with Frontiers:
Notify me on publication
Please enter your email address:
If you already have an account, please login
You don't have a Frontiers account ? You can register here
Objective: Robotic-assisted surgery is increasingly used in gynecology, offering technological and ergonomic benefits that overcome the limitations of traditional laparoscopy. This retrospective study evaluates perioperative outcomes, learning curve, and feasibility of robotic-assisted surgery for benign gynecological indications using the Da Vinci Xi Surgical System (Intuitive Surgical) at the Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics at Frauenzentrum Bern, Lindenhofspital AG, Switzerland. Methods: Between August 2021 and November 2024, 106 consecutive patients underwent ro-botic-assisted surgery for various benign gynecological conditions. Clinical and perioperative out-comes were assessed. To evaluate the learning curve, the cohort was divided chronologically into two equal groups (first 53 and subsequent 53 cases). Differences between groups were analysed using mul-tivariate logistic regression. The impact of potential predictors on total operation time was assessed using multivariate linear regression (significance level: p < 0.05). Predictors included: age, body mass index (BMI), uterine weight, parity, previous surgery, console time, operation time, conversion rate, blood transfusions, number of incisions, and patient group. Results: All cases were successfully completed robotically without conversion to laparotomy. No serious adverse events occurred. Logistic regression showed significant differences between the two groups in a 0.008-times heavier uterine weight (Confidence Intervals (CI) 0.003 - 0.014; p = 0.003), a 0.11-times higher BMI (CI 0.01 - 0.21; p = 0.032), a 0.06-times shorter console time (CI 0.01 - 0.10; p = 0.010), and a 1.91-times lower number of incisions (CI 0.43 - 3.39; p = 0.011) in the second group. Operation time did not differ significantly (p = 0.76). Linear regression showed that uterine weight and console time (both p < 0.001) were associated with operation time. Operation time in-creased by 7.6 (CI 5.2 - 9.9) minutes per 100g of uterine weight, and by 7.8 (CI 5.5 - 9.8) minutes per 10 additional minutes of console time. Conclusion: Robotic-assisted surgery is a safe and feasible alternative to conventional laparoscopy in benign gynecology. The learning curve was demonstrated by reduced console time and fewer inci-sions in later cases, despite higher BMI and uterine weight. Further studies should assess patient ben-efits and cost-effectiveness compared to conventional laparoscopy.
Keywords: Robotic-assisted surgery, da Vinci robot, benign gynecological diseases, perioperativeoutcomes, Learning Curve
Received: 01 Aug 2025; Accepted: 13 Nov 2025.
Copyright: © 2025 Oujjat, Rothmund, Aghayev, Tsaousidis and Mueller. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
* Correspondence: Martin Mueller, martin.mueller@unibe.ch
Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
