Efficacy between Conventional Laparoscopy and Robotic Surgery in Mexican Patients with Endometriosis: A Comparative Study

Cindy Bandala, Juan Pablo Cifuentes-Chacón, Alfredo Cortés Vázquez, Rodrigo Ruz-Barros, Leonardo Garrocho-Hernández, Alfredo Cortés-Algara, Alfredo Cortes-Algara
Journal of clinical medicine · 2024 · vol. 13(12) , pp. 3576 · doi:10.3390/jcm13123576 · PMID:38930105 · PMC11205068 · W4399810628
article OA: gold CC0 ⤵ 1 in-corpus citation
📄 Open PDF View on OpenAlex View on PubMed View at publisher
⚙ AI-generated summary by claude@2026-06, 2026-06-09 ⓘ

This comparative study found that robot-assisted laparoscopy for deep endometriosis in Mexican patients resulted in a shorter postoperative hospital stay and less frequent pain compared to conventional laparoscopy.

One-sentence paraphrase of the abstract; not a substitute for reading it. No clinical advice. How this works

Abstract

Background. Surgical management of endometriosis is essential, and deep endometriosis involves the invasion of endometrial tissue into other organs such as the bladder, ureters, and rectum. In Latin American countries, significant expertise has been achieved in conventional laparoscopy (CL); however, there is less experience in robot-assisted laparoscopy (RAL) because of the high cost of this technique. For this reason, studies comparing CL and RAL for the treatment of deep endometriosis in patients are scarce, making this study the first to share the experience of Mexican patients. Aim. The efficacy of CL vs. RAL in the management of deep endometriosis in Mexican patients was compared. Materials and Methods. We performed a retrospective and comparative study. We considered all patients treated with minimally invasive surgery for deep endometriosis between 2015 and 2023. Results. A total of 93 patients were included; 56 patients were treated with CL, and 37 patients were treated with RAL. A significant difference (p < 0.05) was observed in the postoperative length of stay, which was longer in patients treated with CL compared with those treated with RAL. Additionally, postoperative pain was less frequent in patients treated with RAL than in those treated with CL (p < 0.05). We did not observe a significant difference in operative time, blood loss, or perioperative complications between the two surgical techniques (p < 0.05). Conclusions. CL and RAL are effective methods for managing endometriosis in Mexican patients; however, RAL is beneficial for the treatment of deep endometriosis because patients experience postoperative pain less frequently than CL patients and have a shorter postoperative length of stay.

My notes (saved in your browser only)

Condition tags

endometriosis

Citation neighborhood

Papers in the corpus that this work cites (lower rings, blue) and that cite this one (upper rings, green). Dot size scales with the paper's in-corpus citation count — bigger dot = more influential within the endo/adeno field. Click a dot to open that paper. [ expand to 2 hops ] — adds papers reached through this work's immediate citers/citees. Heavier; up to 60 extra dots.

References (46)

Cited by (1)

Source provenance

europepmc
last seen: 2026-06-17T06:13:18.893374+00:00
openalex
last seen: 2026-06-10T17:14:06.276822+00:00
pubmed
last seen: 2026-05-18T00:32:29.383801+00:00
License: CC0 · commercial use OK