ROBOTICS AND ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE (AI) IN GYNECOLOGIC SURGERY: PRACTICAL BENEFITS IN OVERT LAPAROSCOPY (NARRATIVE REVIEW 2021–2025)
Abstract
Introduction and Objectives: Gynecological surgery has undergone rapid development in recent years, from traditional laparoscopy to surgical robots increasingly supported by artificial intelligence. Robotic surgery is already standard in many gynecological oncology centers. However, there is considerable debate about its real advantages over laparoscopy, both from the perspective of patients, surgeons, and payers.
Brief Description of the State of Knowledge: The aim of the following narrative was to critically review the comparative practical benefits of both robotic surgery and laparoscopy in operative gynecology, with particular emphasis on clinical trial results, patient safety, operator ergonomics, learning curve, costs, and the role of artificial intelligence.
Methodology: A narrative literature review was conducted. PubMed/MEDLINE and Google Scholar were searched from 2021 to 2025 using English-language search terms such as: "robotic gynecologic surgery," "robot-assisted hysterectomy," "laparoscopic hysterectomy comparison," "endometrial cancer staging robotic," "deep infiltrating endometriosis robotic," "robotic sacrocolpopexy," "ergonomics surgeon laparoscopy," "learning curve robotic gynecology," "artificial intelligence gynecologic surgery," "cost analysis robotic hysterectomy," and "Poland robotic surgery NFZ financing."
References
Aftab, N., et al. (2025). Artificial intelligence in obstetrics and gynaecology: Advancing precision surgery and decision support. Best Practice & Research Clinical Obstetrics & Gynaecology.
Andersson, K. K., et al. (2025). From practice to perfection: Learning curves and case volume for robotic-assisted hysterectomy performed for benign indications. Preprint.
Arcieri, M., Restaino, S., et al. (2025). Robotic surgery in severely obese frail patients for the treatment of atypical endometrial hyperplasia and endometrial cancer: A propensity-matched analysis at an ESGO-accredited center. Cancers, 17(3), 482.
Bahadur, A., et al. (2024). Robotic-assisted versus conventional laparoscopic hysterectomy: A systematic review of perioperative outcomes. Journal of Mid-Life Health, 15(2), 123–135.
Balafoutas, D., et al. (2025). Optimising ergonomics in minimally invasive gynaecological surgery: Strategies to reduce musculoskeletal strain for surgeons. Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics, 311(4), 765–778.
Borkowska, A. (2025, March). NFZ wydał setki milionów złotych na zabiegi z wykorzystaniem robotów chirurgicznych. Polityka Zdrowotna.
Brian, R., Murillo, A., Gomes, C., & Alseidi, A. (2024). Artificial intelligence and robotic surgical education. Global Surgical Education – Journal of the Association for Surgical Education, 3, Article 60.
Buderath, P., et al. (2023). Hysterectomy in benign conditions: A 20-year single-center retrospective analysis comparing laparoscopic and robotic approaches. Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics, 308(2), 431–442.
Chang, C. L., et al. (2022). Clinical outcomes of robotic versus laparoscopic radical hysterectomy in early-stage cervical cancer. Journal of Gynecologic Oncology, 33(6), e90.
Chen, W., Ma, J., Yang, Z., Han, X., Hu, C., Wang, H., Peng, Y., Zhang, L., & Jiang, B. (2024). Robotic-assisted laparoscopic versus abdominal and laparoscopic myomectomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis. International Journal of Gynaecology and Obstetrics, 166(3), 994–1005.
Cho, Y. J., et al. (2024). Surgeon posture and workload in complex gynecologic laparoscopy versus robotic pelvic surgery: An observational electromyography study. Journal of Minimally Invasive Gynecology, 31(2), 245–254.
Cooper, H., et al. (2025). Systematic review of ergonomic strain among gynecologic surgeons: Laparoscopy versus robotics. Journal of Minimally Invasive Gynecology, 32(1), 15–27.
Del Calvo, H., et al. (2023). Simulation-based curriculum for robotic gynecologic surgery: Establishing proficiency benchmarks. Journal of Robotic Surgery, 17(5), 1123–1134.
Delso, V., et al. (2025). Clinical applications of artificial intelligence in robotic gynecologic oncology. Cancers, 17(4), 710.
Dixon, F., et al. (2023). Pain and discomfort in gynecologic surgeons performing advanced laparoscopy: A cross-sectional survey. Gynecologic Oncology Reports, 47, 101152.
Ferrari, F. A., et al. (2024). Robotic surgery for deep infiltrating endometriosis: Feasibility, nerve-sparing techniques and functional outcomes. Journal of Clinical Medicine, 13(22), 5801.
Fu, H., et al. (2023). Robot-assisted radical hysterectomy and lymphadenectomy in cervical cancer: Perioperative morbidity and oncologic safety. Gynecologic Oncology, 170(1), 45–54.
Ghimire, A., et al. (2025). Electromyographic assessment of neck and shoulder strain in gynecologic surgeons: Comparing conventional laparoscopy and robotic console surgery. European Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Reproductive Biology, 295, 120–128.
Gorce, P., et al. (2025). Work-related musculoskeletal disorders in minimally invasive gynecologic surgery: A meta-analysis of ergonomic risk. International Urogynecology Journal, 36(3), 499–512.
Greenberg, A. L., et al. (2022). Virtual reality simulators and structured curricula for robotic gynecologic surgery: Impact on trainee readiness. Surgical Endoscopy, 36(9), 7124–7135.
Haveman, I., et al. (2022). Robot-assisted total hysterectomy in different classes of obesity: A cohort study. JSLS: Journal of the Society of Laparoscopic & Robotic Surgeons, 26(3), e2022.00045.
Hyun, S. H., et al. (2025). Comparison of surgical outcomes between single-port access laparoscopic and single-site robotic surgery in benign gynecologic diseases: A single-center cohort study. Journal of Clinical Medicine, 14(3), 799.
Imboden, S., et al. (2025). On-demand robotic surgery for hysterectomy: How flexible access to a robotic platform changed case allocation in a tertiary gynecologic center. Journal of Robotic Surgery, 19(2), 233–244.
Ioana, J. T. P. M., et al. (2024). AI-assisted ureteral identification during complex gynecologic oncology procedures: A pilot study. Diagnostics, 14(6), 1220.
Jayasinghe, J. D., et al. (2025). Real-time ureteric navigation using augmented reality and AI during robotic gynecologic surgery. Frontiers in Surgery, 12, 1421.
Joshi, R., et al. (2024). Robotic-assisted surgery for endometrial cancer: Perioperative outcomes in a high-volume oncogynecology unit. Gynecologic Oncology, 173(2), 210–219.
Kadoch, E., et al. (2024). Impact of body mass index on surgical complexity and patient safety in robotic gynecologic oncology procedures. Gynecologic Oncology, 174(1), 55–63.
Keelan, S., et al. (2025). Surgeon training in the era of computer-enhanced gynecologic surgery: Towards competency-based credentialing. Journal of Minimally Invasive Gynecology, 32(4), 601–612.
Kivekäs, E., et al. (2025). Robotic versus laparoscopic radical hysterectomy: A randomized controlled trial of perioperative outcomes and operative time. American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology, 233(1), 45.e1–45.e12.
Khojah, B., et al. (2025). Real-time deep learning for ureter segmentation in gynecologic robotic surgery using YOLO-based models. arXiv Preprint.
Kulka, D. (2022, October). Robot da Vinci na Zaspie: 10,4 mln zł na nowoczesną chirurgię dla pacjentów onkologicznych. Pomorskie.eu.
Lee, J., et al. (2024). Charting proficiency in robotic gynecologic oncology: Objective performance metrics and competency milestones. Annals of Surgical Oncology, 31(7), 5012–5024.
Lenfant, L., et al. (2023). Robotic versus laparoscopic hysterectomy for benign gynecologic disease: Perioperative outcomes in a multicenter French cohort. Journal of Robotic Surgery, 17(1), 77–88.
Lugowski, F., et al. (2024). Minimally invasive hysterectomy and lymph node staging in high-BMI patients with endometrial cancer: Real-world outcomes from a Polish tertiary center. Medical Research Journal, 9(2), 145–155.
Ma, Y., et al. (2025). The future of robot-assisted surgery in gynecology: Autonomous camera guidance, AI-supported dissection and safety alerts. Best Practice & Research Clinical Obstetrics & Gynaecology, 99, 101–115.
Mansour Jamaleddine, H., et al. (2025). Sacrocolpopexy in the era of robotic pelvic floor reconstruction: Updated systematic review of safety, mesh-related complications, and functional outcomes. Frontiers in Urogynecology, 4, 220–241.
Mathilde, D. M., et al. (2025). Impact of morbid obesity on feasibility of robotic hysterectomy for atypical hyperplasia and early endometrial cancer. Journal of Robotic Surgery, 19(3), 311–322.
Medonet.pl Editorial Team. (2022, October). Operacje ginekologiczne robotem da Vinci w ramach programu „Strategia Zdrowia Kobiet”. Medonet.pl.
Menon, N., et al. (2025). Surgeon strain during complex pelvic surgery: Robotic consoles versus conventional laparoscopy. International Urogynecology Journal, 36(5), 789–800.
OSOZ Blog Editorial Team. (2025, September). Chirurgia robotowa 2025: NFZ dopłacił dodatkowe 82,1 mln zł. OSOZ Blog.
Ota, K., et al. (2025). Comparison of surgical outcomes between robotic and laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy with concomitant total hysterectomy for pelvic organ prolapse. Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology Research, 51(9), e70068.
Özkan, A., et al. (2025). Evaluation of robot-assisted gynecologic surgery simulation skills using virtual reality metrics. Surgical Endoscopy, 39(2), 2104–2116.
Padte, K., et al. (2024). Deep infiltrating endometriosis: Robotic nerve-sparing pelvic dissection and functional pelvic floor outcomes. Journal of Minimally Invasive Gynecology, 31(8), 950–962.
Pavone, M., et al. (2024). Robotic-assisted versus laparoscopic surgery for deep infiltrating endometriosis. Journal of Clinical Medicine, 13(14), 4102.
Pavone, M., et al. (2025). Unveiling the real benefits of robot-assisted surgery in gynaecology. Frontiers in Surgery, 12, 1501.
Pérez-Salazar, M. J., et al. (2024). Wearable sensor analysis of neck and shoulder load in gynecologic surgeons. Sensors, 24(7), 3120.
Raimondo, D., et al. (2024). Laparotomic versus robotic surgery in elderly patients with endometrial cancer. International Journal of Gynaecology and Obstetrics, 157, 1–10.
Ronsini, C., et al. (2025). Robotic surgery in gynecologic oncology: Current evidence and future perspectives. Cancers, 17(5), 812.
Rooma, S., et al. (2023). Real-world data over a decade of robotic surgery for benign gynecological conditions. Journal of Robotic Surgery, 17(2), 255–267.
Shaalan, W., et al. (2025). Artificial intelligence–guided camera control and autonomous assistance in gynecologic robotic surgery. Surgical Innovation, 32(1), 33–45.
Sheng, Y., et al. (2023). Robotic-assisted laparoscopic myomectomy versus conventional laparoscopy. Fertility and Sterility, 120(4), 721–733.
Shugaba, A., et al. (2022). Should all minimal access gynecologic surgery be robot-assisted? Obstetrics & Gynecology International, 2022, 1–12.
Tetteh, E., et al. (2024). Minimally invasive surgery with sentinel lymph node navigation. Journal of Gynecologic Oncology, 36(4), e122.
Togami, S., et al. (2025). Sentinel lymph node mapping in robotic versus laparoscopic staging. Journal of Gynecologic Oncology, 36(5), e140.
Truong, M. D., et al. (2022). The role of robotic surgery in benign gynecology. Journal of Minimally Invasive Gynecology, 29(6), 780–792.
Tsakos, E., et al. (2023). Multi-port robotic-assisted laparoscopic myomectomy. Journal of Robotic Surgery, 17(4), 399–409.
Valorenzos, A., et al. (2025). Quantifying surgeon fatigue during robotic hysterectomy using wearable biosensors. Sensors in Surgery, 4(1), 55–69.
Wang, Z., et al. (2022). Automated phase recognition and skill assessment in gynecologic robotic surgery. Surgical Endoscopy, 36(11), 8458–8471.
Wong, S. W., et al. (2025). Ergonomic challenges of robotic gynecologic surgery. Journal of Minimally Invasive Gynecology, 32(5), 921–934.
Yoshimura, T., et al. (2024). Safe implementation of robotic surgery for gynecologic oncology. Gynecologic Oncology Reports, 50, 101200.
Zuluaga, L., et al. (2024). Deep learning–based instrument tracking and tissue segmentation in gynecologic robotic surgery. IEEE Transactions on Medical Robotics and Bionics, 6(2), 233–245.
Copyright (c) 2025 Kacper Sukiennicki, Bartłomiej Czarnecki, Jan Nowak, Illia Koval, Bartosz Zwoliński, Wirginia Bertman, Natalia Kołdej, Zuzanna Kępczyńska, Wiktor Kubik, Katarzyna Szewczyk, Kamil Borysewicz, Klaudia Romejko
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
All articles are published in open-access and licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0). Hence, authors retain copyright to the content of the articles.
CC BY 4.0 License allows content to be copied, adapted, displayed, distributed, re-published or otherwise re-used for any purpose including for adaptation and commercial use provided the content is attributed.
