Literature DB >> 21099613

Robotic-assisted hysterectomy for endometrial cancer compared with traditional laparoscopic and laparotomy approaches: a systematic review.

Giorgia Gaia1, Robert W Holloway, Luigi Santoro, Sarfraz Ahmad, Elena Di Silverio, Arsenio Spinillo.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To summarize comparative studies describing clinical outcomes of robotic-assisted surgeries compared with traditional laparoscopic or laparotomy techniques for the treatment of endometrial cancer. DATA SOURCES: Using search words "robotic hysterectomy" and "endometrial cancer," 22 citations were identified from Medline and PubMed (2005 to February 2010). METHODS OF STUDY SELECTION: We selected English language studies reporting at least 25 robotic cases compared with laparoscopic or laparotomy cases that also addressed surgical technique, complications, and perioperative outcomes. Patients underwent total hysterectomy, bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy, and lymphadenectomy. TABULATION, INTEGRATION, AND
RESULTS: Eight eligible comparative studies were identified that included 1,591 patients (robotic=589, laparoscopic=396, and laparotomy=606). Pooled means of the resected aortic lymph nodes for robotic hysterectomy and laparoscopy were 10.3 and 7.8 (P=.15), and robotic hysterectomy and laparotomy were 9.4 and 5.7 (P=.28). Pooled means of pelvic lymph nodes for robotic and laparoscopic hysterectomy were 18.5 and 17.8 (P=.95) and 18.0 compared with 14.5 (P=.11) for robotic hysterectomy compared with laparotomy. Estimated blood loss was reduced in robotic hysterectomy compared with laparotomy (P<.005) and laparoscopy (P=.001). Length of stay was shorter for both robotic and laparoscopic cases compared with laparotomy (P<.01). Operative time for robotic hysterectomy was similar to laparoscopic cases but was greater than laparotomy (P<.005). Conversion to laparotomy for laparoscopic hysterectomy was 9.9% compared with 4.9% for robotic cases (P=.06). Vascular, bowel, and bladder injuries; cuff dehiscence; and thromboembolic complications were similar for each surgical method. Transfusions for robotic hysterectomy compared with laparotomy was 1.7% and 7.2% (P=.06) and robotic hysterectomy compared were laparoscopy was 2.6% and 5.0% (P=.22).
CONCLUSION: Perioperative clinical outcomes for robotic and laparoscopic hysterectomy appear similar with the exception of less blood loss for robotic cases and longer operative times for robotic and laparoscopy cases.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 21099613     DOI: 10.1097/AOG.0b013e3181f74153

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Obstet Gynecol        ISSN: 0029-7844            Impact factor:   7.661


  31 in total

Review 1.  New Developments in Minimally Invasive Gynecologic Oncology Surgery.

Authors:  Katherine Ikard Stewart; Amanda N Fader
Journal:  Clin Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2017-06       Impact factor: 2.190

2.  Cross-disciplinary research in cancer: an opportunity to narrow the knowledge-practice gap.

Authors:  R Urquhart; E Grunfeld; L Jackson; J Sargeant; G A Porter
Journal:  Curr Oncol       Date:  2013-12       Impact factor: 3.677

3.  Robotic surgery compared with laparotomy for high-grade endometrial cancer.

Authors:  Alok Pant; Julian Schink; John Lurain
Journal:  J Robot Surg       Date:  2014-01-12

4.  Outcomes of gynecologic oncology patients undergoing robotic-assisted laparoscopic procedures in a university setting.

Authors:  Christen L Walters Haygood; Janelle M Fauci; Mary Katherine Huddleston-Colburn; Warner K Huh; J Michael Straughn
Journal:  J Robot Surg       Date:  2014-03-04

5.  Robotic-assisted total laparoscopic hysterectomy and staging for the treatment of endometrial cancer: a comparison with conventional laparoscopy and abdominal approaches.

Authors:  Ricardo Estape; Nicholas Lambrou; Eric Estape; Oscar Vega; Trisha Ojea
Journal:  J Robot Surg       Date:  2011-06-25

6.  The technique of robotic assisted laparoscopic surgery in gynaecology, its introduction into the clinical routine of a gynaecological department and the analysis of the perioperative courses - a German experience.

Authors:  A Kubilay Ertan; Michael Ulbricht; Kirsten Huebner; Alexander Di Liberto
Journal:  J Turk Ger Gynecol Assoc       Date:  2011-06-01

7.  Diffusion of robotic-assisted laparoscopic technology across specialties: a national study from 2008 to 2013.

Authors:  Yen-Yi Juo; Aditya Mantha; Ahmad Abiri; Anne Lin; Erik Dutson
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2017-08-25       Impact factor: 4.584

8.  Comparative effectiveness of robotic versus laparoscopic hysterectomy for endometrial cancer.

Authors:  Jason D Wright; William M Burke; Elizabeth T Wilde; Sharyn N Lewin; Abigail S Charles; Jin Hee Kim; Noah Goldman; Alfred I Neugut; Thomas J Herzog; Dawn L Hershman
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2012-01-30       Impact factor: 44.544

9.  Patient satisfaction with robotic surgery.

Authors:  Emma Long; Fiona Kew
Journal:  J Robot Surg       Date:  2017-12-29

10.  Operative and anesthetic outcomes in endometrial cancer staging via three minimally invasive methods.

Authors:  Nicole D Fleming; Allison E Axtell; Scott E Lentz
Journal:  J Robot Surg       Date:  2011-11-01
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.