Ultra-minimally invasive surgery in gynecological patients: a review of the literature

In the last decade, Ultra-minimally invasive surgery (UMIS) including both minilaparoscopic (MH) and percutaneous (PH) endoscopic surgery achieved widespread use around the world. Despite UMIS has been reported as safe and feasible surgical procedure, most of the available data are drawn from retrospective studies, with a limited number of cases and heterogeneous surgical procedures included in the analysis. This literature review aimed to analyze the most methodologically valid studies concerning major gynecological surgeries performed in UMIS. A literature review was performed double blind from January to April 2021. The keywords ‘minilaparoscopy’; ‘ultra minimally invasive surgery’; ‘3 mm’; ‘percutaneous’; and ‘Hysterectomy’ were selected in Pubmed, Medscape, Scopus, and Google scholar search engines. PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines were followed for the drafting of the systematic review. The systematic literature research provided 298 studies, of which 9 fell within the inclusion criteria. Two hundred ninety-six total patients were included, 148 for both PH and MH groups. Median age (48 years), BMI (24 kg/m2), OT (90 min), EBL (50 ml), time to discharge (1 day), self scar evaluation (10/10), and VAS (3/10) were reported. The most frequent intraoperative complication in both the PH and MH groups was surgical bleeding. The UMIS approaches were feasible and safe even for complex gynecological procedures. Operative times and complications were superimposable to the “classical” minimally invasive approaches reported in the literature. The reported results apply only to experienced surgeons.