Christos Iavazzo1, Ioannis D Gkegkes2. 1. IASO Maternity Hospital, Athens, Greece. Electronic address: christosiavazzo@hotmail.com. 2. First Department of Surgery, General Hospital of Attica "KAT," Athens, Greece.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Cervical cancer represents one of the most common types of neoplasia among women; the use of minimally invasive techniques in the treatment of cervical cancer is a challenge. OBJECTIVES: To present evidence regarding robotic technology in the performance of pelvic exenteration in cases of cervical cancer. SEARCH STRATEGY: PubMed and Scopus databases were searched. SELECTION CRITERIA: Articles examining the use of robotic technology for pelvic exenteration in cases of cervical cancer were included. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Four studies were included. MAIN RESULTS: Most cancers treated with robotic-assisted pelvic exenteration were squamous cell carcinomas of the cervix. The stage of primary cancer ranged from IB2 to IVA. In 7 of the 8 patients, anterior pelvic exenteration was performed; the other patient underwent total pelvic exenteration. Procedure duration ranged from 375 to 600 minutes; blood loss was 200-550 mL. Postoperative complications occurred in 2 of the 8 patients and included perineal abscess, Miami pouch fistula, and ureteral stenosis. Postoperative hospital stay ranged from 3 to 53 days, and postoperative follow-up ranged from 2 to 31 months. CONCLUSIONS: The gold standard for pelvic exenteration remains the open surgical approach; however, the application of robotic technology could be an alternate choice associated with excellent results.
BACKGROUND:Cervical cancer represents one of the most common types of neoplasia among women; the use of minimally invasive techniques in the treatment of cervical cancer is a challenge. OBJECTIVES: To present evidence regarding robotic technology in the performance of pelvic exenteration in cases of cervical cancer. SEARCH STRATEGY: PubMed and Scopus databases were searched. SELECTION CRITERIA: Articles examining the use of robotic technology for pelvic exenteration in cases of cervical cancer were included. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Four studies were included. MAIN RESULTS: Most cancers treated with robotic-assisted pelvic exenteration were squamous cell carcinomas of the cervix. The stage of primary cancer ranged from IB2 to IVA. In 7 of the 8 patients, anterior pelvic exenteration was performed; the other patient underwent total pelvic exenteration. Procedure duration ranged from 375 to 600 minutes; blood loss was 200-550 mL. Postoperative complications occurred in 2 of the 8 patients and included perineal abscess, Miami pouch fistula, and ureteral stenosis. Postoperative hospital stay ranged from 3 to 53 days, and postoperative follow-up ranged from 2 to 31 months. CONCLUSIONS: The gold standard for pelvic exenteration remains the open surgical approach; however, the application of robotic technology could be an alternate choice associated with excellent results.