{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2026,9,2]],"date-time":"2026-09-02T12:18:27Z","timestamp":1788351507974,"version":"build-2803163510"},"reference-count":29,"publisher":"Springer Science and Business Media LLC","issue":"1","license":[{"start":{"date-parts":[[2021,5,27]],"date-time":"2021-05-27T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1622073600000},"content-version":"tdm","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"https:\/\/creativecommons.org\/licenses\/by\/4.0"},{"start":{"date-parts":[[2021,5,27]],"date-time":"2021-05-27T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1622073600000},"content-version":"vor","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"https:\/\/creativecommons.org\/licenses\/by\/4.0"}],"content-domain":{"domain":["link.springer.com"],"crossmark-restriction":false},"short-container-title":["BMC Surg"],"published-print":{"date-parts":[[2021,12]]},"abstract":"<jats:title>Abstract<\/jats:title><jats:sec>\n                <jats:title>Background<\/jats:title>\n                <jats:p>This study aimed to evaluate the compatibility of robotic single-site (RSS) myomectomy in comparison with the conventional robotic multi-port (RMP) myomectomy to achieve successful surgical outcomes with reliability and reproducibility.<\/jats:p>\n              <\/jats:sec><jats:sec>\n                <jats:title>Methods<\/jats:title>\n                <jats:p>This retrospective case\u2013control study was performed on 236 robotic myomectomies at a university medical center. After 1:1 propensity score matching for the total myoma number, total myoma diameter, and patient age, 90 patients in each group (RSS: n\u2009=\u200990; RMP: n\u2009=\u200990) were evaluated. Patient demographics, preoperative parameters, intraoperative characteristics, and postoperative outcome measures were analyzed.<\/jats:p>\n              <\/jats:sec><jats:sec>\n                <jats:title>Results<\/jats:title>\n                <jats:p>The body mass index, parity, preoperative hemoglobin levels, mean maximal myoma diameter, and anatomical type of myoma showed no mean differences between RSS and RMP myomectomies. The RSS group was younger, had lesser number of myomas removed, and had a smaller sum of the maximal diameter of total myomas removed than the RMP group. After propensity score matching, the total operative time (RSS: 150.9\u2009\u00b1\u200957.1\u00a0min vs. RMP: 170\u2009\u00b1\u200974.5\u00a0min, p\u2009=\u20090.0296) was significantly shorter in the RSS group. The RSS group tended to have a longer docking time (RSS: 9.8\u2009\u00b1\u20096.5\u00a0min vs. RMP: 8\u2009\u00b1\u20096.2\u00a0min, p\u2009=\u20090.0527), shorter console time (RSS: 111.1\u2009\u00b1\u200952.3\u00a0min vs. RMP: 125.8\u2009\u00b1\u200965.1\u00a0min, p\u2009=\u20090.0665), and shorter time required for in-bag morcellation (RSS: 30.1\u2009\u00b1\u200917.2\u00a0min vs. RMP: 36.2\u2009\u00b1\u200925.7\u00a0min, p\u2009=\u20090.0684). The visual analog scale pain score 1\u00a0day postoperatively was significantly lower in the RSS group (RSS: 2.4\u2009\u00b1\u20090.8\u00a0days vs. RMP: 2.7\u2009\u00b1\u20090.8\u00a0days, p\u2009=\u20090.0149), with similar consumption of analgesic drugs. The rate of transfusion, estimated blood loss during the operation, and length of hospital stay were not different between the two modalities. No other noticeable complications were observed in either group.<\/jats:p>\n              <\/jats:sec><jats:sec>\n                <jats:title>Conclusions<\/jats:title>\n                <jats:p>Da Vinci RSS myomectomy is a compatible option with regard to reproducibility and safety, without significantly compromising the number and sum of the maximal diameter of myomas removed. The advantage of shorter total operative time and less pain with the same amount of analgesic drugs in RSS myomectomy will contribute to improving patient satisfaction.<\/jats:p>\n              <\/jats:sec>","DOI":"10.1186\/s12893-021-01245-9","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2021,5,27]],"date-time":"2021-05-27T04:02:40Z","timestamp":1622088160000},"update-policy":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/springer_crossmark_policy","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":14,"title":["Robotic single-site versus multi-port myomectomy: a case\u2013control study"],"prefix":"10.1186","volume":"21","author":[{"given":"So Hyun","family":"Ahn","sequence":"first","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Joo Hyun","family":"Park","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Hye Rim","family":"Kim","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"SiHyun","family":"Cho","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Myeongjee","family":"Lee","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Seok Kyo","family":"Seo","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Young Sik","family":"Choi","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Byung Seok","family":"Lee","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]}],"member":"297","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2021,5,27]]},"reference":[{"issue":"2","key":"1245_CR1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"181","DOI":"10.1055\/s-0037-1599090","volume":"35","author":"MM McWilliams","year":"2017","unstructured":"McWilliams MM, Chennathukuzhi VM. Recent advances in uterine fibroid etiology. Semin Reprod Med. 2017;35(2):181\u20139.","journal-title":"Semin Reprod Med"},{"issue":"1","key":"1245_CR2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"3","DOI":"10.1002\/ijgo.13102","volume":"149","author":"E Giuliani","year":"2020","unstructured":"Giuliani E, As-Sanie S, Marsh EE. Epidemiology and management of uterine fibroids. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2020;149(1):3\u20139.","journal-title":"Int J Gynaecol Obstet"},{"key":"1245_CR3","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"2789201","DOI":"10.1155\/2016\/2789201","volume":"2016","author":"R Flyckt","year":"2016","unstructured":"Flyckt R, Soto E, Nutter B, Falcone T. Comparison of long-term fertility and bleeding outcomes after robotic-assisted, laparoscopic, and abdominal myomectomy. Obstet Gynecol Int. 2016;2016:2789201.","journal-title":"Obstet Gynecol Int"},{"issue":"6","key":"1245_CR4","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"566.e1\u20135","DOI":"10.1016\/j.ajog.2009.05.049","volume":"201","author":"CE Bedient","year":"2009","unstructured":"Bedient CE, Magrina JF, Noble BN, Kho RM. Comparison of robotic and laparoscopic myomectomy. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2009;201(6):566.e1\u20135.","journal-title":"Am J Obstet Gynecol"},{"issue":"5","key":"1245_CR5","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"551","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jmig.2010.04.015","volume":"17","author":"WH Parker","year":"2010","unstructured":"Parker WH, Einarsson J, Istre O, Dubuisson JB. Risk factors for uterine rupture after laparoscopic myomectomy. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2010;17(5):551\u20134.","journal-title":"J Minim Invasive Gynecol"},{"issue":"4","key":"1245_CR6","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"580","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jmig.2013.12.096","volume":"21","author":"CH Choi","year":"2014","unstructured":"Choi CH, Kim TH, Kim SH, Choi JK, Park JY, Yoon A, et al. Surgical outcomes of a new approach to laparoscopic myomectomy: single-port and modified suture technique. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2014;21(4):580\u20135.","journal-title":"J Minim Invasive Gynecol"},{"issue":"2 Pt 1","key":"1245_CR7","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"256","DOI":"10.1097\/AOG.0b013e318207854f","volume":"117","author":"EE Barakat","year":"2011","unstructured":"Barakat EE, Bedaiwy MA, Zimberg S, Nutter B, Nosseir M, Falcone T. Robotic-assisted, laparoscopic, and abdominal myomectomy: a comparison of surgical outcomes. Obstet Gynecol. 2011;117(2 Pt 1):256\u201365.","journal-title":"Obstet Gynecol"},{"issue":"2 Pt 1","key":"1245_CR8","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"284","DOI":"10.1097\/AOG.0b013e3182602c7d","volume":"120","author":"AR Gargiulo","year":"2012","unstructured":"Gargiulo AR, Srouji SS, Missmer SA, Correia KF, Vellinga TT, Einarsson JI. Robot-assisted laparoscopic myomectomy compared with standard laparoscopic myomectomy. Obstet Gynecol. 2012;120(2 Pt 1):284\u201391.","journal-title":"Obstet Gynecol"},{"issue":"1","key":"1245_CR9","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"64","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jmig.2013.05.004","volume":"21","author":"K Goebel","year":"2014","unstructured":"Goebel K, Goldberg JM. Women\u2019s preference of cosmetic results after gynecologic surgery. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2014;21(1):64\u20137.","journal-title":"J Minim Invasive Gynecol"},{"issue":"5","key":"1245_CR10","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"640","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jmig.2011.06.009","volume":"18","author":"AJ Bush","year":"2011","unstructured":"Bush AJ, Morris SN, Millham FH, Isaacson KB. Women\u2019s preferences for minimally invasive incisions. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2011;18(5):640\u20133.","journal-title":"J Minim Invasive Gynecol"},{"issue":"4","key":"1245_CR11","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"603","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jmig.2016.02.006","volume":"23","author":"S Bogliolo","year":"2016","unstructured":"Bogliolo S, Ferrero S, Cassani C, Musacchi V, Zanellini F, Dominoni M, et al. Single-site versus multiport robotic hysterectomy in benign gynecologic diseases: a retrospective evaluation of surgical outcomes and cost analysis. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2016;23(4):603\u20139.","journal-title":"J Minim Invasive Gynecol"},{"issue":"2","key":"1245_CR12","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"179.e1\u20138","DOI":"10.1016\/j.ajog.2014.07.057","volume":"212","author":"SA Scheib","year":"2015","unstructured":"Scheib SA, Fader AN. Gynecologic robotic laparoendoscopic single-site surgery: prospective analysis of feasibility, safety, and technique. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2015;212(2):179.e1\u20138.","journal-title":"Am J Obstet Gynecol"},{"issue":"6","key":"1245_CR13","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"757","DOI":"10.1007\/s11701-019-00919-0","volume":"13","author":"GN Moawad","year":"2019","unstructured":"Moawad GN, Tyan P, Paek J, Tappy EE, Park D, Choussein S, et al. Comparison between single-site and multiport robot-assisted myomectomy. J Robot Surg. 2019;13(6):757\u201364.","journal-title":"J Robot Surg"},{"issue":"2","key":"1245_CR14","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"191","DOI":"10.1002\/rcs.448","volume":"8","author":"PF Escobar","year":"2012","unstructured":"Escobar PF, Knight J, Rao S, Weinberg L. da Vinci(R) single-site platform: anthropometrical, docking and suturing considerations for hysterectomy in the cadaver model. Int J Med Robot. 2012;8(2):191\u20135.","journal-title":"Int J Med Robot"},{"issue":"6","key":"1245_CR15","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"970","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jmig.2014.08.780","volume":"21","author":"J Brown","year":"2014","unstructured":"Brown J. AAGL advancing minimally invasive gynecology worldwide: statement to the FDA on power morcellation. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2014;21(6):970\u20131.","journal-title":"J Minim Invasive Gynecol"},{"key":"1245_CR16","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Brower V. FDA considers restricting or banning laparoscopic morcellation. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2014;106(10).","DOI":"10.1093\/jnci\/dju339"},{"issue":"9","key":"1245_CR17","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"e369","DOI":"10.1016\/S1470-2045(14)70326-2","volume":"15","author":"V Brower","year":"2014","unstructured":"Brower V. FDA likely to further restrict or ban morcellation. Lancet Oncol. 2014;15(9):e369.","journal-title":"Lancet Oncol"},{"issue":"6","key":"1245_CR18","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"588","DOI":"10.1001\/jama.2014.10041","volume":"312","author":"T Hampton","year":"2014","unstructured":"Hampton T. Use of morcellation to remove fibroids scrutinized at FDA hearings. JAMA. 2014;312(6):588.","journal-title":"JAMA"},{"issue":"6","key":"1245_CR19","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"521","DOI":"10.1097\/AJP.0b013e318169d03b","volume":"24","author":"M Von Korff","year":"2008","unstructured":"Von Korff M, Saunders K, Thomas Ray G, Boudreau D, Campbell C, Merrill J, et al. De facto long-term opioid therapy for noncancer pain. Clin J Pain. 2008;24(6):521\u20137.","journal-title":"Clin J Pain"},{"issue":"2","key":"1245_CR20","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"556","DOI":"10.1016\/j.fertnstert.2007.11.092","volume":"91","author":"C Nezhat","year":"2009","unstructured":"Nezhat C, Lavie O, Hsu S, Watson J, Barnett O, Lemyre M. Robotic-assisted laparoscopic myomectomy compared with standard laparoscopic myomectomy\u2014a retrospective matched control study. Fertil Steril. 2009;91(2):556\u20139.","journal-title":"Fertil Steril"},{"issue":"1","key":"1245_CR21","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"116","DOI":"10.4293\/108680812X13517013317473","volume":"17","author":"JM Gobern","year":"2013","unstructured":"Gobern JM, Rosemeyer CJ, Barter JF, Steren AJ. Comparison of robotic, laparoscopic, and abdominal myomectomy in a community hospital. JSLS. 2013;17(1):116\u201320.","journal-title":"JSLS"},{"key":"1245_CR22","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"113","DOI":"10.1016\/j.bpobgyn.2017.09.005","volume":"46","author":"C Lonnerfors","year":"2018","unstructured":"Lonnerfors C. Robot-assisted myomectomy. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 2018;46:113\u20139.","journal-title":"Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol"},{"issue":"5","key":"1245_CR23","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1370","DOI":"10.1016\/j.fertnstert.2015.02.021","volume":"103","author":"EI Lewis","year":"2015","unstructured":"Lewis EI, Srouji SS, Gargiulo AR. Robotic single-site myomectomy: initial report and technique. Fertil Steril. 2015;103(5):1370-7.e1.","journal-title":"Fertil Steril"},{"issue":"4","key":"1245_CR24","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"733","DOI":"10.1097\/GRF.0000000000000489","volume":"62","author":"A Varghese","year":"2019","unstructured":"Varghese A, Doglioli M, Fader AN. Updates and controversies of robotic-assisted surgery in gynecologic surgery. Clin Obstet Gynecol. 2019;62(4):733\u201348.","journal-title":"Clin Obstet Gynecol"},{"key":"1245_CR25","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Giovannopoulou E, Prodromidou A, Blontzos N, Iavazzo C. The emerging role of robotic single-site approach for myomectomy: a systematic review of the literature. Surg Innov. 2021:1553350620988227.","DOI":"10.1177\/1553350620988227"},{"issue":"1","key":"1245_CR26","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"56","DOI":"10.5468\/ogs.2019.62.1.56","volume":"62","author":"SH Choi","year":"2019","unstructured":"Choi SH, Hong S, Kim M, Bae HS, Kim MK, Kim ML, et al. Robotic-assisted laparoscopic myomectomy: the feasibility in single-site system. Obstet Gynecol Sci. 2019;62(1):56\u201364.","journal-title":"Obstet Gynecol Sci"},{"issue":"5","key":"1245_CR27","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"951","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jmig.2014.04.010","volume":"21","author":"JI Einarsson","year":"2014","unstructured":"Einarsson JI, Cohen SL, Fuchs N, Wang KC. In-bag morcellation. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2014;21(5):951\u20133.","journal-title":"J Minim Invasive Gynecol"},{"issue":"3","key":"1245_CR28","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"491","DOI":"10.1097\/AOG.0000000000000421","volume":"124","author":"SL Cohen","year":"2014","unstructured":"Cohen SL, Einarsson JI, Wang KC, Brown D, Boruta D, Scheib SA, et al. Contained power morcellation within an insufflated isolation bag. Obstet Gynecol. 2014;124(3):491\u20137.","journal-title":"Obstet Gynecol"},{"issue":"4","key":"1245_CR29","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"e34","DOI":"10.1016\/j.fertnstert.2015.01.022","volume":"103","author":"SS Srouji","year":"2015","unstructured":"Srouji SS, Kaser DJ, Gargiulo AR. Techniques for contained morcellation in gynecologic surgery. Fertil Steril. 2015;103(4):e34.","journal-title":"Fertil Steril"}],"container-title":["BMC Surgery"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"https:\/\/link.springer.com\/content\/pdf\/10.1186\/s12893-021-01245-9.pdf","content-type":"application\/pdf","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/link.springer.com\/article\/10.1186\/s12893-021-01245-9\/fulltext.html","content-type":"text\/html","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/link.springer.com\/content\/pdf\/10.1186\/s12893-021-01245-9.pdf","content-type":"application\/pdf","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2021,5,27]],"date-time":"2021-05-27T04:02:58Z","timestamp":1622088178000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/bmcsurg.biomedcentral.com\/articles\/10.1186\/s12893-021-01245-9"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2021,5,27]]},"references-count":29,"journal-issue":{"issue":"1","published-print":{"date-parts":[[2021,12]]}},"alternative-id":["1245"],"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1186\/s12893-021-01245-9","relation":{},"ISSN":["1471-2482"],"issn-type":[{"value":"1471-2482","type":"electronic"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2021,5,27]]},"assertion":[{"value":"7 December 2020","order":1,"name":"received","label":"Received","group":{"name":"ArticleHistory","label":"Article History"}},{"value":"4 May 2021","order":2,"name":"accepted","label":"Accepted","group":{"name":"ArticleHistory","label":"Article History"}},{"value":"27 May 2021","order":3,"name":"first_online","label":"First Online","group":{"name":"ArticleHistory","label":"Article History"}},{"order":1,"name":"Ethics","group":{"name":"EthicsHeading","label":"Declarations"}},{"value":"This study was reviewed and approved by the Institutional Review Board of Severance Hospital, Yonsei University College of Medicine (No. 3-2020-0457). Consent to participate for this study was waived per the approval of the Institutional Review Board of Severance Hospital, Yonsei University College of Medicine, since this was a retrospective study. All methods were performed in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional review board of ethics committee and national research committee with the Helsinki Declaration of 1964 and later versions.","order":2,"name":"Ethics","group":{"name":"EthicsHeading","label":"Ethics approval and consent to participate"}},{"value":"Not applicable.","order":3,"name":"Ethics","group":{"name":"EthicsHeading","label":"Consent for publication"}},{"value":"The authors declare no competing interests.","order":4,"name":"Ethics","group":{"name":"EthicsHeading","label":"Competing interests"}}],"article-number":"264"}}