Surgical outcomes of robotic-assisted surgical staging for endometrial cancer are equivalent to traditional laparoscopic staging at a minimally invasive surgical center
- PMID: 20144471
- PMCID: PMC2896309
- DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2010.01.009
Surgical outcomes of robotic-assisted surgical staging for endometrial cancer are equivalent to traditional laparoscopic staging at a minimally invasive surgical center
Abstract
Objective: To compare peri- and post-operative complications and outcomes of robotic-assisted surgical staging with traditional laparoscopic surgical staging for women with endometrial cancer.
Methods: A retrospective chart review of cases of women undergoing minimally invasive total hysterectomy and pelvic and para-aortic lymphadenectomy by a robotic-assisted approach or traditional laparoscopic approach was conducted. Major intraoperative complications, including vascular injury, enterotomy, cystotomy, or conversion to laparotomy, were measured. Secondary outcomes including operative time, blood loss, transfusion rate, number of lymph nodes retrieved, and the length of hospitalization were also measured.
Results: 275 cases were identified-102 patients with robotic-assisted staging and 173 patients with traditional laparoscopic staging. There was no significant difference in the rate of major complications between groups (p=0.13). The mean operative time was longer in cases of robotic-assisted staging (237 min vs. 178 min, p<0.0001); however, blood loss was significantly lower (109 ml vs. 187 ml, p<0.0001). The mean number of lymph nodes retrieved were similar between groups (p=0.32). There were no significant differences in the time to discharge, re-admission, or re-operation rates between the two groups.
Conclusion: Robotic-assisted surgery is an acceptable alternative to laparoscopy for minimally invasive staging of endometrial cancer. In addition to the improved ease of operation, visualization, and range of motion of the robotic instruments, robotic surgery results in a lower mean blood loss, although longer operative time. More data are needed to determine if the rates of urinary tract injuries and other surgical complications can be reduced with the use of robotic surgery.
Copyright (c) 2010 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Conflict of interest statement
The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest, except Thomas Randall, MD, speaker for Intuitive Surgical.
Similar articles
-
Comparison of outcomes and cost for endometrial cancer staging via traditional laparotomy, standard laparoscopy and robotic techniques.Gynecol Oncol. 2008 Dec;111(3):407-11. doi: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2008.08.022. Epub 2008 Oct 1. Gynecol Oncol. 2008. PMID: 18829091
-
Learning curve and surgical outcome for robotic-assisted hysterectomy with lymphadenectomy: case-matched controlled comparison with laparoscopy and laparotomy for treatment of endometrial cancer.J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2010 Nov-Dec;17(6):739-48. doi: 10.1016/j.jmig.2010.07.008. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2010. PMID: 20955983
-
Robotic-assisted vs traditional laparoscopic surgery for endometrial cancer: a randomized controlled trial.Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2016 Nov;215(5):588.e1-588.e7. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2016.06.005. Epub 2016 Jun 8. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2016. PMID: 27288987 Clinical Trial.
-
Minimally invasive surgery for endometrial cancer: a comprehensive review.Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2015 Apr;291(4):721-7. doi: 10.1007/s00404-014-3517-9. Epub 2014 Oct 25. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2015. PMID: 25344420 Review.
-
[Comparison of robotic surgery with laparoscopy for surgical staging of endometrial cancer: a meta-analysis].Zhonghua Fu Chan Ke Za Zhi. 2017 Mar 25;52(3):175-183. doi: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.0529-567X.2017.03.007. Zhonghua Fu Chan Ke Za Zhi. 2017. PMID: 28355689 Review. Chinese.
Cited by
-
Robot-assisted surgery:--impact on gynaecological and pelvic floor reconstructive surgery.Int Urogynecol J. 2012 Sep;23(9):1163-73. doi: 10.1007/s00192-012-1790-3. Epub 2012 May 26. Int Urogynecol J. 2012. PMID: 22638668 Review.
-
The Role of Robotic Visceral Surgery in Patients with Adhesions: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.J Pers Med. 2022 Feb 18;12(2):307. doi: 10.3390/jpm12020307. J Pers Med. 2022. PMID: 35207795 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Review of Robotic Surgery in Gynecology-The Future Is Here.Rambam Maimonides Med J. 2017 Apr 28;8(2):e0019. doi: 10.5041/RMMJ.10296. Rambam Maimonides Med J. 2017. PMID: 28467761 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Robotic-assisted versus conventional laparoscopic hysterectomy for endometrial cancer.Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol X. 2020 Sep 6;8:100116. doi: 10.1016/j.eurox.2020.100116. eCollection 2020 Oct. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol X. 2020. PMID: 32995747 Free PMC article.
-
Predictive Factor of Conversion to Laparotomy in Minimally Invasive Surgical Staging for Endometrial Cancer.Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2016 Feb;26(2):290-300. doi: 10.1097/IGC.0000000000000594. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2016. PMID: 26569058 Free PMC article.
References
-
- Jemal A, Siegel R, Ward E, Hao Y, Xu J, Thun M. Cancer statistics, 2009. CA Cancer J Clin. 2009;59:225–49. - PubMed
-
- Walker JL, Piedmonte M, Spirtos N, et al. Surgical staging of uterine cancer: randomized Phase III trial of laparoscopy versus laparotomy–a Gynecologic Oncology Group Study (GOG): Preliminary results. J Clin Oncol. 2006;24:18S.
-
- Diaz-Arrastia C, Jurnalov C, Gomez G, Townsend Laparoscopic hysterectomy using a computer-enhanced surgical robot. Surg Endosc. 2002;16:1271–3. - PubMed
-
- Reynolds RK, Advincula AP. Robot-assisted laparoscopic hysterectomy: technique and initial experience. Am J Surg. 2006;191:555–60. - PubMed
-
- Field JB, Benoit MF, Dinh TA, Diaz-Arrastia C. Computer-enhanced robotic surgery in gynecologic oncology. Surg Endosc. 2007;21:244–6. - PubMed
MeSH terms
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources