Literature DB >> 27628778

Comparison of outcomes between laparotomy and robotic technique for cervical cancer.

Ahmet Göçmen1, Fatih Şanlıkan2,3, Mustafa Gazi Uçar1.   

Abstract

We evaluated the results of patients who had undergone robotic-assisted radical hysterectomy or open radical hysterectomy for cervical cancer. The study included eight patients who had undergone robotic-assisted radical hysterectomy (group 1) and seven patients who had undergone radical hysterectomy (group 2). Demographic characteristics and operative results of all patients were compared. Body mass index, age, previous abdominal surgery, surgical procedure performed, total anesthesia duration, operation duration, intra- and postoperative complications, duration of hospital stay, and number of resected lymph nodes were recorded. Mean age of patients in the robotic surgery group was 47.8 years (38-56 years) and in the laparotomy group was 45.4 years (32-57 years). Body mass index was 33.2 kg/m² (24.8-40.2 kg/m²) in group 1 and 27.8 kg/m² (23.5-33.7 kg/m²) in group 2. Total duration of operation in group 1 and 2 was 233 min (185-321 min) and 210.8 min (134-310 min), respectively. Mean duration of hospital stay was 3.5 days (2-7 days) in group 1 and 9.5 days (6-11 days) in group 2. Mean number of resected lymph nodes was 23.6 (17-36) and 38.8 (22-59) in group 1 and 2, respectively. Robotic surgery was superior to laparotomy in terms of duration of hospital stay, estimated amount of blood loss, and number of complications. Operation duration was longer with robotic surgery compared with laparotomy, and rate of complications was higher with laparotomy. Although the number of patients in the present study is limited, the results are important since they represent the first data relating to robotic surgery in Turkey.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Cervical cancer; Robotic surgery

Year:  2010        PMID: 27628778     DOI: 10.1007/s11701-010-0199-6

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Robot Surg        ISSN: 1863-2483


  22 in total

Review 1.  Robot-assisted surgery in gynaecology.

Authors:  Martin K Oehler
Journal:  Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol       Date:  2009-04       Impact factor: 2.100

Review 2.  Modified radical hysterectomy: morbidity and mortality.

Authors:  J F Magrina; M A Goodrich; A L Weaver; K C Podratz
Journal:  Gynecol Oncol       Date:  1995-11       Impact factor: 5.482

Review 3.  Laparoscopic radical hysterectomy for cervical cancer.

Authors:  M Canis; G Mage; J L Pouly; C Pomel; A Wattiez; E Glowaczover; M A Bruhat
Journal:  Baillieres Clin Obstet Gynaecol       Date:  1995-12

4.  Cost and quality-of-life analyses of surgery for early endometrial cancer: laparotomy versus laparoscopy.

Authors:  N M Spirtos; J B Schlaerth; G M Gross; T W Spirtos; A C Schlaerth; S C Ballon
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  1996-06       Impact factor: 8.661

5.  Robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical hysterectomy (Piver type III) with pelvic node dissection--case report.

Authors:  B M Sert; V M Abeler
Journal:  Eur J Gynaecol Oncol       Date:  2006       Impact factor: 0.196

6.  Comparison of outcomes and cost for endometrial cancer staging via traditional laparotomy, standard laparoscopy and robotic techniques.

Authors:  Maria C Bell; Jenny Torgerson; Usha Seshadri-Kreaden; Allison Wierda Suttle; Sharon Hunt
Journal:  Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2008-10-01       Impact factor: 5.482

7.  Robotic versus open radical hysterectomy: a comparative study at a single institution.

Authors:  Emily M Ko; Michael G Muto; Ross S Berkowitz; Colleen M Feltmate
Journal:  Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2008-10-16       Impact factor: 5.482

8.  A detailed analysis of the learning curve: robotic hysterectomy and pelvic-aortic lymphadenectomy for endometrial cancer.

Authors:  Leigh G Seamon; Jeffrey M Fowler; Debra L Richardson; Matthew J Carlson; Sue Valmadre; Gary S Phillips; David E Cohn
Journal:  Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2009-05-09       Impact factor: 5.482

9.  A case-control study of robot-assisted type III radical hysterectomy with pelvic lymph node dissection compared with open radical hysterectomy.

Authors:  John F Boggess; Paola A Gehrig; Leigh Cantrell; Aaron Shafer; Mildred Ridgway; Elizabeth N Skinner; Wesley C Fowler
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2008-10       Impact factor: 8.661

10.  Robotic hysterectomy and pelvic-aortic lymphadenectomy for endometrial cancer.

Authors:  Leigh G Seamon; David E Cohn; Debra L Richardson; Sue Valmadre; Matthew J Carlson; Gary S Phillips; Jeffrey M Fowler
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2008-12       Impact factor: 7.661

View more
  2 in total

Review 1.  Robot-assisted surgery:--impact on gynaecological and pelvic floor reconstructive surgery.

Authors:  O E O'Sullivan; B A O'Reilly
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2012-05-26       Impact factor: 2.894

Review 2.  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
  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.