Table 2.

Studies concerning telelap alf-x/senhance (AX/S) robotic surgery

Authors, years	Type of study	Cases number	Surgery	Stage	OT min	Ebl ml	Conversion rate	HS day	Complication number/type	Outcomes	BMI median
Gueli Alletti et al., 2018	Pilot study	10	Hysterectomy and bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy	10 IA	110	100	0	2	0	AX/S platform could be safe for hysterectomy even in obese patients	33.3
Rossitto et al., 2016	Retrospective study. Cost analysis	81	Hysterectomy, bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy with or without pelvic node dissection	81 IA	215	30	6 3 laparoscopy: hemorrhage, bladder injury, large uterine size 3 Laparotomy: large uterus, fixed uterus, anaesthesiology issue	2	2 1 bladder injury 1 severe intra-operative bleeding	AX/S robotic hysterectomy is feasible and safe and could offer specific advantages in terms of cost	–
Gueli Alletti et al., 2016	Retrospective cohort study	43	Hysterectomy, bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy with or without pelvic node dissection	43 IA	160	62	3 1 Laparoscopy: Large uterus 2 Laparotomy: severe adhesions, anaesthesiology issue	2	1 1 pelvic hematoma	AX/S approach is feasible and safe in endometrial cancer staging	25
Fanfani et al., 2015	Phase II study	44	Hysterectomy, salpingo-oophorectomy, pelvic node dissection	28 IA 16 IB	197	30	5 3 Laparoscopy: intraoperative hemorrhage, bladder injury, large uterine size 2 Laparotomy: large uterus, anesthesiology issue	2	2 1 bladder injury 1 severe intraoperative bleeding	AX/S approach is feasible and safe in endometrial cancer staging	24
Fanfani et al., 2015	Phase II study	34	Hysterectomy, salpingo-oophorectomy, pelvic node dissection	34 IA	160	50	3 1 Laparoscopy: intraoperative bleeding 2 Laparotomy: Large uterine size, anesthesiology issue	2	0	AX/S is feasible and safe	23.7

OT operative time, HS hospital stay, Ebl estimated blood loss, AX/S telelap alf-x/senhance, BMI body mass index