INTRODUCTION: Comparison of perioperative outcomes and recurrence in patients undergoing primary surgical treatment for endometrial cancer by robotics, laparoscopy, vaginal/laparoscopy, or laparotomy approaches. METHODS: Prospective analysis of 67 patients undergoing robotic surgery for endometrial cancer between March 2004 and December 2007. Comparison was made with similar patients operated between November 1999 and December 2006 by laparoscopy (37 cases), laparotomy (99 cases) and vaginal/laparoscopy approach (vaginal hysterectomy, bilateral adnexectomy/laparoscopic lymphadenectomy) (47 cases) and matched by age, body mass index (BMI), histological type and International Federation of Gynecologists and Obstetricians (FIGO) staging. RESULTS: Mean operating times for patients undergoing robotic, laparoscopy, vaginal/laparoscopy or laparotomy approach were 181.9, 189.5, 202.7 and 162.7 min, respectively (p = 0.006); mean blood loss was 141.4, 300.8, 300.0 and 472.6 ml, respectively (p <0.001); mean number of nodes was 24.7, 27.1, 28.6, and 30.9, respectively (p = 0.008); mean length of hospital stay was 1.9, 3.4, 3.5 and 5.6 days, respectively (p < 0.001). There were no significant differences in intra- or postoperative complications among the four groups. The conversion rate was 2.9% for robotics and 10.8% for the laparoscopy group (0.001). There were no differences relative to recurrence rates among the four groups: 9%, 14%, 11% and 15% for robotics, laparoscopy, vaginal/laparoscopy, and laparotomy, respectively. CONCLUSION: Robotics, laparoscopy and vaginal/laparoscopy techniques are preferable to laparotomy for suitable patients with endometrial cancer. Robotics is preferable to laparoscopy due to a shorter hospital stay and lower conversion rate and preferable to vaginal/laparoscopy due to a reduced hospitalization.
INTRODUCTION: Comparison of perioperative outcomes and recurrence in patients undergoing primary surgical treatment for endometrial cancer by robotics, laparoscopy, vaginal/laparoscopy, or laparotomy approaches. METHODS: Prospective analysis of 67 patients undergoing robotic surgery for endometrial cancer between March 2004 and December 2007. Comparison was made with similar patients operated between November 1999 and December 2006 by laparoscopy (37 cases), laparotomy (99 cases) and vaginal/laparoscopy approach (vaginal hysterectomy, bilateral adnexectomy/laparoscopic lymphadenectomy) (47 cases) and matched by age, body mass index (BMI), histological type and International Federation of Gynecologists and Obstetricians (FIGO) staging. RESULTS: Mean operating times for patients undergoing robotic, laparoscopy, vaginal/laparoscopy or laparotomy approach were 181.9, 189.5, 202.7 and 162.7 min, respectively (p = 0.006); mean blood loss was 141.4, 300.8, 300.0 and 472.6 ml, respectively (p <0.001); mean number of nodes was 24.7, 27.1, 28.6, and 30.9, respectively (p = 0.008); mean length of hospital stay was 1.9, 3.4, 3.5 and 5.6 days, respectively (p < 0.001). There were no significant differences in intra- or postoperative complications among the four groups. The conversion rate was 2.9% for robotics and 10.8% for the laparoscopy group (0.001). There were no differences relative to recurrence rates among the four groups: 9%, 14%, 11% and 15% for robotics, laparoscopy, vaginal/laparoscopy, and laparotomy, respectively. CONCLUSION: Robotics, laparoscopy and vaginal/laparoscopy techniques are preferable to laparotomy for suitable patients with endometrial cancer. Robotics is preferable to laparoscopy due to a shorter hospital stay and lower conversion rate and preferable to vaginal/laparoscopy due to a reduced hospitalization.
Authors: Yulia Lakhman; Stephanie Nougaret; Maura Miccò; Chiara Scelzo; Hebert A Vargas; Ramon E Sosa; Elizabeth J Sutton; Dennis S Chi; Hedvig Hricak; Evis Sala Journal: Radiographics Date: 2015 Jul-Aug Impact factor: 5.333
Authors: Slavcho T Tomov; Grigor A Gorchev; Desislava K Kiprova; Aleksandar D Lyubenov; Nadezhda H Hinkova; Vesela D Tomova; Zornitsa V Gorcheva; Sarfraz Ahmad Journal: J Robot Surg Date: 2022-02-10
Authors: V Zanagnolo; D Rollo; T Tomaselli; P G Rosenberg; L Bocciolone; F Landoni; G Aletti; M Peiretti; F Sanguineti; A Maggioni Journal: Obstet Gynecol Int Date: 2013-08-01