Single-Site Robotic Radical Hysterectomy and Sentinel Lymphnode Biopsy in Cervical Cancer: A Case Report

Silva, Alexandre Silva e; Fernandes, Rodrigo; Araújo, Magali; Carvalho, J. P.; Carvalho, Filomena Marino; Favero, Giovani Mastrantônio; Carvalho, Jesus Paula

doi:10.1055/s-0036-1597752

Cited by 10 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Only 4 cases of RSSRH plus PL were reported in the literature, one is a case-report for a FIGO stage IB1 cervical cancer, the other 3 cases have been recently described in a retrospective study and were treated with this procedure for cervical cancers that had no specified stage [ 18 19 ]. Another author described a case of a cervical carcinoma treated with RSSRH with sentinel lymph node biopsy [ 20 ]. There are no studies available in the literature reporting this intervention in a series of patients.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Robotic single site radical hysterectomy plus pelvic lymphadenectomy in gynecological cancers

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectiveTo evaluate the feasibility and the safety of robotic single-site radical hysterectomy (RSSRH) plus pelvic lymphadenectomy (PL) in endometrial or cervical cancer.MethodsPatients with endometrial cancer (EC) International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) stage II, early cervical cancer (ECC) FIGO stage IB1 or locally advanced cervical cancer (LACC) FIGO stage IB2–IIB with clinical response ≥50% after neo-adjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) were enrolled in a prospective cohort trial. All cases were performed using the da Vinci Si Surgical Single Site System®.ResultsBetween April 2014 and November 2016, twenty patients were included in our pilot study. Three and 17 patients underwent type B1 or C1 RSSRH plus PL, respectively. The median age of patients was 46 years (range, 36–68 years) and the median body mass index was 23.5 kg/m2 (range, 19.1–36.3 kg/m2). The median total operative time was 190 minutes (range, 90–310 minutes). The median blood loss was 75 mL (range, 20–700 mL) and the median number of pelvic lymph nodes removed was 16 (range, 5–27). No laparoscopic/laparotomic conversions were reported and the median time to discharge was 6 days (range, 4–16 days). No intra-operative complications occurred while 4 (20%) post-operative complications were reported: one pelvic abscess, one lymphorrea, one bowel perforation, and one vaginal dehiscence.ConclusionRSSRH plus PL is technically feasible in patients affected by gynecological cancer.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Robotic single site radical hysterectomy plus pelvic lymphadenectomy in gynecological cancers

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Robotic single site radical hysterectomy Only 4 cases of RSSRH plus PL were reported in the literature, one is a case-report for a FIGO stage IB1 cervical cancer, the other 3 cases have been recently described in a retrospective study and were treated with this procedure for cervical cancers that had no specified stage [18,19]. Another author described a case of a cervical carcinoma treated with RSSRH with sentinel lymph node biopsy [20]. There are no studies available in the literature reporting this intervention in a series of patients.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Robotic single site radical hysterectomy plus pelvic lymphadenectomy in gynecological cancers

Vizza¹,

Chiofalo²,

Cutillo³

et al. 2018

J Gynecol Oncol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: To evaluate the feasibility and the safety of robotic single-site radical hysterectomy (RSSRH) plus pelvic lymphadenectomy (PL) in endometrial or cervical cancer. Methods: Patients with endometrial cancer (EC) International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) stage II, early cervical cancer (ECC) FIGO stage IB1 or locally advanced cervical cancer (LACC) FIGO stage IB2-IIB with clinical response ≥50% after neo-adjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) were enrolled in a prospective cohort trial. All cases were performed using the da Vinci Si Surgical Single Site System ® . Results: Between April 2014 and November 2016, twenty patients were included in our pilot study. Three and 17 patients underwent type B1 or C1 RSSRH plus PL, respectively. The median age of patients was 46 years (range, 36-68 years) and the median body mass index was 23.5 kg/m 2 (range, 19.1-36.3 kg/m 2 ). The median total operative time was 190 minutes (range, 90-310 minutes). The median blood loss was 75 mL (range, 20-700 mL) and the median number of pelvic lymph nodes removed was 16 (range, 5-27). No laparoscopic/ laparotomic conversions were reported and the median time to discharge was 6 days (range, 4-16 days). No intra-operative complications occurred while 4 (20%) post-operative complications were reported: one pelvic abscess, one lymphorrea, one bowel perforation, and one vaginal dehiscence. Conclusion: RSSRH plus PL is technically feasible in patients affected by gynecological cancer.

show abstract

“…When reviewing the literature, we found quite a few case reports that described unique surgeries performed in a variety of gynecological indications, including ovarian indications requiring surgery,60 and the next step in robotic surgery aims at surgical site minimization—single-port robotic surgery 26,61,62. As proved by these publications, robotic surgery is still evolving, and the future is wide and unknown.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Review of Robotic Surgery in Gynecology—The Future Is Here

Lauterbach¹,

Matanes²,

Löwenstein³

2017

Rambam Maimonides Med J

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The authors present a systematic review of randomized and observational, retrospective and prospective studies to compare between robotic surgery as opposed to laparoscopic, abdominal, and vaginal surgery for the treatment of both benign and malignant gynecologic indications. The comparison focuses on operative times, surgical outcomes, and surgical complications associated with the various surgical techniques. PubMed was the main search engine utilized in search of study data. The review included studies of various designs that included at least 25 women who had undergone robotic gynecologic surgery. Fifty-five studies (42 comparative and 13 non-comparative) met eligibility criteria. After careful analysis, we found that robotic surgery was consistently connected to shorter post-surgical hospitalization when compared to open surgery, a difference less significant when compared to laparoscopic surgery. Also, it seems that robotic surgery is highly feasible in gynecology. There are quite a few inconsistencies regarding operative times and estimated blood loss between the different approaches, though in the majority of studies estimated blood loss was lower in the robotic surgery group. The high variance in operative times resulted from the difference in surgeon’s experience. The decision whether robotic surgery should become mainstream in gynecological surgery or remain another surgical technique in the gynecological surgeon’s toolbox requires quite a few more randomized controlled clinical trials. In any case, in order to bring robotic surgery down to the front row of surgery, training surgeons is by far the most important goal for the next few years.

show abstract

Single-Site Robotic Radical Hysterectomy and Sentinel Lymphnode Biopsy in Cervical Cancer: A Case Report

Cited by 10 publications

References 23 publications

Robotic single site radical hysterectomy plus pelvic lymphadenectomy in gynecological cancers

Robotic single site radical hysterectomy plus pelvic lymphadenectomy in gynecological cancers

Robotic single site radical hysterectomy plus pelvic lymphadenectomy in gynecological cancers

Review of Robotic Surgery in Gynecology—The Future Is Here

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About