Uterine fibroids are the most common solid pelvic tumor in women and a leading indication for hysterectomy in the United States.1 As a result, they represent significant morbidity for many women and are a major public health problem. By age 50, 70% of white women and 80% of black women have fibroids.2
Although fibroids are sometimes asymptomatic, the symptoms most commonly reported are abnormal uterine bleeding (AUB) with resultant anemia and bulk/pressure symptoms. Uterine fibroids also are associated with reproductive dysfunction, such as recurrent pregnancy loss, and even infertility.3
The clinical diagnosis of uterine fibroids is made based on a combination of physical examination and imaging studies, including pelvic ultrasonography, saline infusion sonography, and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). When medical management, such as combination oral contraceptive pills, fails in patients with AUB and/or bulk predominant symptoms or patients present with compromised fertility, the only option for conservative surgical management is a myomectomy.4
The route of myomectomy—hysteroscopy, laparotomy, conventional laparoscopic myomectomy (LM), or robot-assisted laparoscopic myomectomy (RALM)—depends on the size, number, location, and consistency of the uterine fibroids and, to a certain extent, the indication for the myomectomy. In some cases, multiple routes must be used to achieve optimal results, and sometimes these procedures have to be staged. In this literature review and technical summary, we focus on conventional LM and RALM approaches.
Literature review: In the right hands, LM and RALM have clear benefits
In the past, laparotomy was the surgical route of choice for fibroid removal. This surgery was associated with a long hospital stay, a high rate of blood transfusions, postoperative pain, and a lengthy recovery period. As minimally invasive surgery gained popularity, conventional LM became more commonly performed and was accepted by many as the gold standard approach for myomectomy.5
LM has considerable advantages over laparotomy
Compared with the traditional, more invasive route, the conventional LM approach has many benefits. These include less blood loss, decreased postoperative pain, shorter recovery time, shorter hospitalization stay, and decreased perioperative complications.6 LM should be considered the first-line approach unless the size of an intramural myoma exceeds 10 to 12 cm or multiple myomas (consensus, approximately 4 or more) are present and necessitate several incisions according to their varying locations within the uterus.7,8 While this is a recommendation, reports have been published on the successful laparoscopic approach to myomas larger than 20 cm, demonstrating that a skilled, experienced surgeon can perform this procedure safely.9-11
Many studies comparing LM with the abdominal approach showed that LM is associated with decreased blood loss, less postoperative pain, shorter hospital stay, and quicker recovery.12-14 Unfortunately, myomectomy via conventional laparoscopy can be technically challenging, thereby limiting patient accessibility to this approach. Major challenges with conventional LM include enucleation of the fibroid along the correct plane and a multilayered hysterotomy closure.15 The obvious concern with the latter is the potential risk for uterine rupture when improperly performed as a result of deficient suturing skills. Accordingly, several cases of uterine rupture in the second and third trimester of pregnancy after LM led to recommendations for stricter selection criteria, which excluded patients with fibroids larger than 5 cm, multiple fibroids, and deep intramural fibroids.16
Continue to: The RALM approach