Literature DB >> 21394663

Robotics versus laparoscopic radical hysterectomy with lymphadenectomy in patients with early cervical cancer: a multicenter study.

Raffaele Tinelli1, Mario Malzoni, Francesco Cosentino, Ciro Perone, Annarita Fusco, Ettore Cicinelli, Farr Nezhat.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to retrospectively compare the safety, morbidity, and recurrence rate of total laparoscopic radical hysterectomy (TLRH) with lymphadenectomy and total robotic radical hysterectomy (RRH) with lymphadenectomy for early cervical carcinoma in a series of 99 consecutive women.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: We studied 99 consecutive patients with FIGO stage Ia1 (LVSI), Ia2, Ib1, Ib2, and IIa cervical cancer, 76 of whom underwent TLRH and 23 underwent RRH with pelvic lymph node dissection. Para-aortic lymphadenectomy, with the superior border of the dissection being the inferior mesenteric artery, was performed in all cases with positive pelvic lymph nodes discovered at frozen section evaluation.
RESULTS: The mean blood loss was 157 ml in the RRH group (95% confidence interval [95% CI] 50-400) and 95 ml in the TLRH group (95% CI 30-500) (not significant [NS]). The median length of hospital stay was 3 days in the RRH group (95% CI 2-7) and 4 days in the TLRH group (95% CI 3-7) (NS). The mean operating time was 255 min for the TLRH group (95% CI 182-415) compared with 323 min in the RRH group (95% CI 161-433) (P < 0.05). No significant difference was found between the 2 groups when comparing the recurrence rate.
CONCLUSIONS: Robotic radical hysterectomy can be considered a safe and effective therapeutic procedure for managing early-stage cervical cancer without significant differences, if compared with laparoscopic radical hysterectomy, in terms of the recurrence rate and intraoperative and postoperative complications, although multicenter randomized clinical trials with longer follow-up are necessary to evaluate the overall oncologic outcomes of this procedure.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21394663     DOI: 10.1245/s10434-011-1611-9

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol        ISSN: 1068-9265            Impact factor:   5.344


  17 in total

1.  Minimally Invasive Radical Hysterectomy for Cervical Cancer: When Adoption of a Novel Treatment Precedes Prospective, Randomized Evidence.

Authors:  Alexander Melamed; J Alejandro Rauh-Hain; Pedro T Ramirez
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2019-09-27       Impact factor: 44.544

2.  Robot-assisted laparoscopic transperitoneal infrarenal lymphadenectomy in patients with locally advanced cervical cancer by single docking: Do we need a backup procedure?

Authors:  Fatih Gucer; Selim Misirlioglu; Nuri Ceydeli; Cagatay Taskiran
Journal:  J Robot Surg       Date:  2017-03-02

3.  Expanding the indications for radical trachelectomy: a report on 29 patients with stage IB1 tumors measuring 2 to 4 centimeters.

Authors:  Stephanie L Wethington; Yukio Sonoda; Kay J Park; Kaled M Alektiar; William P Tew; Dennis S Chi; Mario M Leitao; Elizabeth L Jewell; Richard R Barakat; Nadeem R Abu-Rustum
Journal:  Int J Gynecol Cancer       Date:  2013-07       Impact factor: 3.437

Review 4.  Robot-assisted hysterectomy for endometrial and cervical cancers: a systematic review.

Authors:  Immaculate F Nevis; Bahareh Vali; Caroline Higgins; Irfan Dhalla; David Urbach; Marcus Q Bernardini
Journal:  J Robot Surg       Date:  2016-07-16

5.  Robotic surgery in gynecology: an updated systematic review.

Authors:  Lori Weinberg; Sanjay Rao; Pedro F Escobar
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol Int       Date:  2011-11-28

6.  Learning curve analysis of laparoscopic radical hysterectomy for gynecologic oncologists without open counterpart experience.

Authors:  Tae-Wook Kong; Suk-Joon Chang; Jiheum Paek; Hyogyeong Park; Seong Woo Kang; Hee-Sug Ryu
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol Sci       Date:  2015-09-22

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

Authors:  Ga Won Yim; Sang Wun Kim; Eun Ji Nam; Sunghoon Kim; Hee Jung Kim; Young Tae Kim
Journal:  Yonsei Med J       Date:  2014-09       Impact factor: 2.759

Review 8.  Robotic Surgery in Gynecology.

Authors:  Jean Bouquet de Joliniere; Armando Librino; Jean-Bernard Dubuisson; Fathi Khomsi; Nordine Ben Ali; Anis Fadhlaoui; J M Ayoubi; Anis Feki
Journal:  Front Surg       Date:  2016-05-02

9.  Complication reports for robotic surgery using three arms by a single surgeon at a single institution.

Authors:  Ching-Hui Chen; Huang-Hui Chen; Wei-Min Liu
Journal:  J Minim Access Surg       Date:  2017 Jan-Mar       Impact factor: 1.407

10.  Robotic-Assisted Radical Hysterectomy Results in Better Surgical Outcomes Compared With the Traditional Laparoscopic Radical Hysterectomy for the Treatment of Cervical Cancer.

Authors:  Ji-Chan Nie; An-Qi Yan; Xi-Shi Liu
Journal:  Int J Gynecol Cancer       Date:  2017-11       Impact factor: 3.437

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.