Objective To compare peri- and post-operative complications and outcomes of robotic-assisted surgical staging with traditional laparoscopic surgical staging for women with endometrial cancer. Methods A retrospective chart review of cases of women undergoing minimally invasive total hysterectomy and pelvic and para-aortic lymphadenectomy by a robotic-assisted approach or traditional laparoscopic approach was conducted. Major intraoperative complications, including vascular injury, enterotomy, cystotomy, or conversion to laparotomy, were measured. Secondary outcomes including operative time, blood loss, transfusion rate, number of lymph nodes retrieved, and the length of hospitalization were also measured. Results 275 cases were identified–102 patients with robotic-assisted staging and 173 patients with traditional laparoscopic staging. There was no significant difference in the rate of major complications between groups (p=0.13). The mean operative time was longer in cases of robotic-assisted staging (237 min vs. 178 min, p<0.0001); however, blood loss was significantly lower (109 ml vs. 187 ml, p<0.0001). The mean number of lymph nodes retrieved were similar between groups (p=0.32). There were no significant differences in the time to discharge, re-admission, or re-operation rates between the two groups. Conclusion Robotic-assisted surgery is an acceptable alternative to laparoscopy for minimally invasive staging of endometrial cancer. In addition to the improved ease of operation, visualization, and range of motion of the robotic instruments, robotic surgery results in a lower mean blood loss, although longer operative time. More data are needed to determine if the rates of urinary tract injuries and other surgical complications can be reduced with the use of robotic surgery.

No abstract

ObjectiveTo compare peri- and postoperative outcomes and complications of laparoscopic vs. robotic-assisted surgical staging for women with endometrial cancer at two established academic institutions.MethodsRetrospective chart review of all women that underwent total hysterectomy with pelvic and para-aortic lymphadenectomy by robotic-assisted or laparoscopic approach over a four-year period by three surgeons at two academic institutions. Intraoperative and postoperative complications were measured. Secondary outcomes included operative time, blood loss, transfusion rate, number of lymph nodes retrieved, length of hospital stay and need for re-operation or re-admission.ResultsFour hundred and thirty-two cases were identified: 187 patients with robotic-assisted and 245 with laparoscopic staging. Both groups were statistically comparable in baseline characteristics. The overall rate of intraoperative complications was similar in both groups (1.6% vs. 2.9%, p=0.525) but the rate of urinary tract injuries was statistically higher in the laparoscopic group (2.9% vs. 0%, p=0.020). Patients in the robotic group had shorter hospital stay (1.96 days vs. 2.45 days, p=0.016) but an average 57 minutes longer surgery than the laparoscopic group (218 vs. 161 minutes, p=0.0001). There was less conversion rate (0.5% vs. 4.1%; relative risk, 0.21; 95% confidence interval, 0.03 to 1.34; p=0.027) and estimated blood loss in the robotic than in the laparoscopic group (187 mL vs. 110 mL, p=0.0001). There were no significant differences in blood transfusion rate, number of lymph nodes retrieved, re-operation or re-admission between the two groups.ConclusionRobotic-assisted surgery is an acceptable alternative to laparoscopy for staging of endometrial cancer and, in selected patients, it appears to have lower risk of urinary tract injury.

The introduction of minimally invasive surgery in other gynecologic cancers has shown benefits with similar oncologic outcomes. However, the biology and complexity of surgery for ovarian cancer may preclude this approach for ovarian cancer patients. Our objective is to assess feasibility to achieve complete cytoreductive surgery after neoadjuvant chemotherapy for stage IIIC-IV ovarian cancer patients via minimally invasive surgery. Our data sources include PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Biosis, Clinicaltrials.gov, and the Cochrane Library. Meta-analysis was performed using the random-effects model with DerSimonian and Laird estimator for the amount of heterogeneity to estimate the pooled outcomes. A funnel plot and Egger's regression test were used to test publication bias. The Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale was used to assess the quality of the studies. There were 6 studies (3 prospective, 3 retrospective) that met the criteria for meta-analysis with a total of 3231 patients, 567 were in the minimally invasive group and 2664 in the laparotomy group. Both groups were similar in stage and serous histology. Complete cytoreductive surgery was achieved in 74.50% (95% CI 40.41-97.65%) and 53.10% (95% CI 4.88-97.75%) of patients in the minimally invasive and laparotomy groups, respectively. There was no statistical significant difference between these 2 pooled proportions (p = 0.52). Three studies compared minimally invasive surgery vs laparotomy. No significant difference was observed between the 2 groups in obtaining complete cytoreductive surgery [OR = 0.90 (95% CI 0.70-1.16; p = 0.43)]. A symmetrical funnel plot indicated no publication bias. The pooled proportion for grade> 2 postoperative complications was not significant among the laparoscopy group [3.11% (95% CI 0.00-10.24%; p = 0.15)]. Complete cytoreductive surgery appears feasible and safe with minimally invasive surgery in selected advanced ovarian cancer patients after neoadjuvant chemotherapy.