Literature DB >> 22819573

Comparison of perioperative outcomes and cost of robotic-assisted laparoscopy, laparoscopy and laparotomy for endometrial cancer.

Pluvio J Coronado1, Miguel A Herraiz, Javier F Magrina, María Fasero, Jose A Vidart.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To analyze the perioperative outcomes and cost of three surgical approaches in the treatment of endometrial cancer: robotic, laparoscopy and laparotomy. STUDY
DESIGN: We studied 347 patients with endometrial cancer treated in a single institution: 71 patients were operated by robotics, 84 by conventional laparoscopy and 192 by laparotomy. All patients underwent total hysterectomy, bilateral salpingoophorectomy and pelvic and para-aortic lymphadenectomy depending on the pathological features.
RESULTS: Operative time was longer in the laparoscopy group as compared to robotics and laparotomy (218.2 min, 189.2 min, and 157.4 min respectively, p=0.000). The estimated blood loss was lower in the robotic group relative to the other groups (99.4 ml in robotic, 190.0 ml in laparoscopy and 231.5 ml in laparotomy, p=0.000). Similar findings were observed for the pre- and post-operative mean hemoglobin levels (-1.3g/dl, -2.3g/dl and -2.5 g/dl respectively, p=0.000), and transfusion rate (4.2%, 7.1% and 14.1% respectively, p=0.036). The length of hospital stay was higher in the laparotomy group compared to robotics and laparoscopy (8.1, 3.5 and 4.6 days respectively; p=0.000). The conversion rate to laparotomy was lower for robotics (2.4% for robotics and 8.1% for laparoscopy, p=0.181). Overall complications were similar for robotics and laparoscopy (21.1%, 28.5%) (p=0.079). Robotic complications were significantly lower as compared to laparotomy (21.2 vs 34.9% (p=0.036). No differences were found relative to disease-free or overall survival among the three groups. The global costs were similar for the three approaches (p=0.566).
CONCLUSION: Robotics is a safe alternative to laparoscopy and laparotomy for endometrial cancer patients, offering improved perioperative outcomes and similar cost as compared to the other two surgical approaches.
Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22819573     DOI: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2012.07.006

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol        ISSN: 0301-2115            Impact factor:   2.435


  25 in total

1.  Robot-assisted surgery in gynaecology.

Authors:  Theresa A Lawrie; Hongqian Liu; DongHao Lu; Therese Dowswell; Huan Song; Lei Wang; Gang Shi
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2019-04-15

2.  Peri-operative and survival outcomes analysis of patients with endometrial cancer managed by three surgical approaches: a long-term Bulgarian experience.

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

3.  Impact of robotic surgery on patient flow and resource use intensity in ovarian cancer.

Authors:  Jeremie Abitbol; Beste Kucukyazici; Sonya Brin; Susie Lau; Shannon Salvador; Agnihotram V Ramanakumar; Roy Kessous; Liron Kogan; John D Fletcher; Valerie Pare-Miron; Gilbert Liu; Walter H Gotlieb
Journal:  J Robot Surg       Date:  2022-08-04

Review 4.  The incidence of postoperative symptomatic lymphocele after pelvic lymphadenectomy between abdominal and laparoscopic approach: a systemic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Jong Ha Hwang; Bo Wook Kim
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2022-04-25       Impact factor: 3.453

5.  Herniation formation in women undergoing robotically assisted laparoscopy or laparotomy for endometrial cancer.

Authors:  Maria B Schiavone; Maciej S Bielen; Ginger J Gardner; Oliver Zivanovic; Elizabeth L Jewell; Yukio Sonoda; Richard R Barakat; Dennis S Chi; Nadeem R Abu-Rustum; Mario M Leitao
Journal:  Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2016-01-08       Impact factor: 5.482

Review 6.  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

7.  Comparative Effectiveness of Minimally Invasive Hysterectomy for Endometrial Cancer.

Authors:  Jason D Wright; William M Burke; Ana I Tergas; June Y Hou; Yongmei Huang; Jim C Hu; Grace Clarke Hillyer; Cande V Ananth; Alfred I Neugut; Dawn L Hershman
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2016-02-01       Impact factor: 44.544

Review 8.  Robot-assisted surgery versus conventional laparoscopic surgery for endometrial cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Weimin Xie; Dongyan Cao; Jiaxin Yang; Keng Shen; Lin Zhao
Journal:  J Cancer Res Clin Oncol       Date:  2016-05-23       Impact factor: 4.553

9.  Comparison of robotic surgery and laparoscopy to perform total hysterectomy with pelvic adhesions or large uterus.

Authors:  Li-Hsuan Chiu; Ching-Hui Chen; Pei-Chia Tu; Ching-Wen Chang; Yuan-Kuei Yen; Wei-Min Liu
Journal:  J Minim Access Surg       Date:  2015 Jan-Mar       Impact factor: 1.407

10.  Comparison of robotic surgery with laparoscopy and laparotomy for treatment of endometrial cancer: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Longke Ran; Jing Jin; Yan Xu; Youquan Bu; Fangzhou Song
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-09-26       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.