Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2014 Sep;55(5):1222-30.
doi: 10.3349/ymj.2014.55.5.1222.

Surgical outcomes of robotic radical hysterectomy using three robotic arms versus conventional multiport laparoscopy in patients with cervical cancer

Affiliations
Comparative Study

Surgical outcomes of robotic radical hysterectomy using three robotic arms versus conventional multiport laparoscopy in patients with cervical cancer

Ga Won Yim et al. Yonsei Med J. 2014 Sep.

Abstract

Purpose: To compare surgical outcomes of robotic radical hysterectomy (RRH) using 3 robotic arms with those of conventional laparoscopy in patients with early cervical cancer.

Materials and methods: A retrospective cohort study included 102 patients with stage 1A1-IIA2 cervical carcinoma, of whom 60 underwent robotic and 42 underwent laparoscopic radical hysterectomy (LRH) with pelvic lymph node dissection performed between December 2009 and May 2013. Perioperative outcomes were compared between two surgical groups.

Results: Robotic approach consisted of 3 robotic arms including the camera arm and 1 conventional assistant port. Laparoscopic approach consisted of four trocar insertions with conventional instruments. There were no conversions to laparotomy. Mean age, body mass index, tumor size, cell type, and clinical stage were not significantly different between two cohorts. RRH showed favorable outcomes over LRH in terms of estimated blood loss (100 mL vs. 145 mL, p=0.037), early postoperative complication rates (16.7% vs. 30.9%, p=0.028), and postoperative complications necessitating intervention by Clavien-Dindo classification. Total operative time (200.5±61.1 minutes vs. 215.6±83.1 minutes, p=0.319), mean number of lymph node yield (23.3±9.3 vs. 21.7±9.8, p=0.248), and median length of postoperative hospital stay (11 days vs. 10 days, p=0.129) were comparable between robotic and laparoscopic group, respectively. The median follow-up time was 44 months with 2 recurrences in the robotic and 3 in the laparoscopic cohort.

Conclusion: Surgical outcomes of RRH and pelvic lymphadenectomy were comparable to that of laparoscopic approach, with significantly less blood loss and early postoperative complications.

Keywords: Cervical cancer; laparoscopy; robotics.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors have no financial conflicts of interest.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Port placement. (A) Robotic radical hysterectomy. (B) Laparoscopic radical hysterectomy.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Medeiros LR, Rosa DD, Bozzetti MC, Fachel JM, Furness S, Garry R, et al. Laparoscopy versus laparotomy for benign ovarian tumour. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2009:CD004751. - PubMed
    1. Nieboer TE, Johnson N, Lethaby A, Tavender E, Curr E, Garry R, et al. Surgical approach to hysterectomy for benign gynaecological disease. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2009:CD003677. - PubMed
    1. Advincula AP, Wang K. Evolving role and current state of robotics in minimally invasive gynecologic surgery. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2009;16:291–301. - PubMed
    1. Lin PS, Wakabayashi MT, Han ES. Role of robotic surgery in endometrial cancer. Curr Treat Options Oncol. 2009;10:33–43. - PubMed
    1. Mendivil A, Holloway RW, Boggess JF. Emergence of robotic assisted surgery in gynecologic oncology: American perspective. Gynecol Oncol. 2009;114(2 Suppl):S24–S31. - PubMed

Publication types