Robotic surgery for endometrial cancer: Comparison of perioperative outcomes and recurrence with laparoscopy, vaginal/laparoscopy and laparotomy

J. F. Magrina, V. Zanagnolo, D. Giles, B. N. Noble, R. M C Kho, Paul Magtibay

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

41 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Introduction: Comparison of perioperative outcomes and recurrence in patients undergoing primary surgical treatment for endometrial cancer by robotics, laparoscopy, vaginal/laparoscopy, or laparotomy approaches. Methods: Prospective analysis of 67 patients undergoing robotic surgery for endometrial cancer between March 2004 and December 2007. Comparison was made with similar patients operated between November 1999 and December 2006 by laparoscopy (37 cases), laparotomy (99 cases) and vaginal/laparoscopy approach (vaginal hysterectomy, bilateral adnexectomy/laparoscopic lymphadenectomy) (47 cases) and matched by age, body mass index (BMI), histological type and International Federation of Gynecologists and Obstetricians (FIGO) staging. Results: Mean operating times for patients undergoing robotic, laparoscopy, vaginal/laparoscopy or laparotomy approach were 181.9, 189.5, 202.7 and 162.7 min, respectively (p = 0.006); mean blood loss was 141.4, 300.8, 300.0 and 472.6 ml, respectively (p < 0.001); mean number of nodes was 24.7, 27.1, 28.6, and 30.9, respectively (p = 0.008); mean length of hospital stay was 1.9, 3.4, 3.5 and 5.6 days, respectively (p < 0.001). There were no significant differences in intra- or postoperative complications among the four groups. The conversion rate was 2.9% for robotics and 10.8% for the laparoscopy group (0.001). There were no differences relative to recurrence rates among the four groups: 9%, 14%, 11% and 15% for robotics, laparoscopy, vaginal/laparoscopy, and laparotomy, respectively. Conclusion: Robotics, laparoscopy and vaginal/laparoscopy techniques are preferable to laparotomy for suitable patients with endometrial cancer. Robotics is preferable to laparoscopy due to a shorter hospital stay and lower conversion rate and preferable to vaginal/laparoscopy due to a reduced hospitalization.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)476-480
Number of pages5
JournalEuropean Journal of Gynaecological Oncology
Volume32
Issue number5
StatePublished - 2011

Fingerprint

Robotics
Endometrial Neoplasms
Laparoscopy
Laparotomy
Recurrence
Length of Stay
Vaginal Hysterectomy
Intraoperative Complications
Lymph Node Excision
Hospitalization
Body Mass Index

Keywords

  • Endometrial cancer
  • Laparoscopy
  • Robotics

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Obstetrics and Gynecology
  • Oncology

Cite this

Robotic surgery for endometrial cancer : Comparison of perioperative outcomes and recurrence with laparoscopy, vaginal/laparoscopy and laparotomy. / Magrina, J. F.; Zanagnolo, V.; Giles, D.; Noble, B. N.; Kho, R. M C; Magtibay, Paul.

In: European Journal of Gynaecological Oncology, Vol. 32, No. 5, 2011, p. 476-480.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{bc2de2a67ab3406d8dc7dbbf88e14eb5,
title = "Robotic surgery for endometrial cancer: Comparison of perioperative outcomes and recurrence with laparoscopy, vaginal/laparoscopy and laparotomy",
abstract = "Introduction: Comparison of perioperative outcomes and recurrence in patients undergoing primary surgical treatment for endometrial cancer by robotics, laparoscopy, vaginal/laparoscopy, or laparotomy approaches. Methods: Prospective analysis of 67 patients undergoing robotic surgery for endometrial cancer between March 2004 and December 2007. Comparison was made with similar patients operated between November 1999 and December 2006 by laparoscopy (37 cases), laparotomy (99 cases) and vaginal/laparoscopy approach (vaginal hysterectomy, bilateral adnexectomy/laparoscopic lymphadenectomy) (47 cases) and matched by age, body mass index (BMI), histological type and International Federation of Gynecologists and Obstetricians (FIGO) staging. Results: Mean operating times for patients undergoing robotic, laparoscopy, vaginal/laparoscopy or laparotomy approach were 181.9, 189.5, 202.7 and 162.7 min, respectively (p = 0.006); mean blood loss was 141.4, 300.8, 300.0 and 472.6 ml, respectively (p < 0.001); mean number of nodes was 24.7, 27.1, 28.6, and 30.9, respectively (p = 0.008); mean length of hospital stay was 1.9, 3.4, 3.5 and 5.6 days, respectively (p < 0.001). There were no significant differences in intra- or postoperative complications among the four groups. The conversion rate was 2.9{\%} for robotics and 10.8{\%} for the laparoscopy group (0.001). There were no differences relative to recurrence rates among the four groups: 9{\%}, 14{\%}, 11{\%} and 15{\%} for robotics, laparoscopy, vaginal/laparoscopy, and laparotomy, respectively. Conclusion: Robotics, laparoscopy and vaginal/laparoscopy techniques are preferable to laparotomy for suitable patients with endometrial cancer. Robotics is preferable to laparoscopy due to a shorter hospital stay and lower conversion rate and preferable to vaginal/laparoscopy due to a reduced hospitalization.",
keywords = "Endometrial cancer, Laparoscopy, Robotics",
author = "Magrina, {J. F.} and V. Zanagnolo and D. Giles and Noble, {B. N.} and Kho, {R. M C} and Paul Magtibay",
year = "2011",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "32",
pages = "476--480",
journal = "European Journal of Gynaecological Oncology",
issn = "0392-2936",
publisher = "S.O.G. CANADA Inc.",
number = "5",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Robotic surgery for endometrial cancer

T2 - Comparison of perioperative outcomes and recurrence with laparoscopy, vaginal/laparoscopy and laparotomy

AU - Magrina, J. F.

AU - Zanagnolo, V.

AU - Giles, D.

AU - Noble, B. N.

AU - Kho, R. M C

AU - Magtibay, Paul

PY - 2011

Y1 - 2011

N2 - Introduction: Comparison of perioperative outcomes and recurrence in patients undergoing primary surgical treatment for endometrial cancer by robotics, laparoscopy, vaginal/laparoscopy, or laparotomy approaches. Methods: Prospective analysis of 67 patients undergoing robotic surgery for endometrial cancer between March 2004 and December 2007. Comparison was made with similar patients operated between November 1999 and December 2006 by laparoscopy (37 cases), laparotomy (99 cases) and vaginal/laparoscopy approach (vaginal hysterectomy, bilateral adnexectomy/laparoscopic lymphadenectomy) (47 cases) and matched by age, body mass index (BMI), histological type and International Federation of Gynecologists and Obstetricians (FIGO) staging. Results: Mean operating times for patients undergoing robotic, laparoscopy, vaginal/laparoscopy or laparotomy approach were 181.9, 189.5, 202.7 and 162.7 min, respectively (p = 0.006); mean blood loss was 141.4, 300.8, 300.0 and 472.6 ml, respectively (p < 0.001); mean number of nodes was 24.7, 27.1, 28.6, and 30.9, respectively (p = 0.008); mean length of hospital stay was 1.9, 3.4, 3.5 and 5.6 days, respectively (p < 0.001). There were no significant differences in intra- or postoperative complications among the four groups. The conversion rate was 2.9% for robotics and 10.8% for the laparoscopy group (0.001). There were no differences relative to recurrence rates among the four groups: 9%, 14%, 11% and 15% for robotics, laparoscopy, vaginal/laparoscopy, and laparotomy, respectively. Conclusion: Robotics, laparoscopy and vaginal/laparoscopy techniques are preferable to laparotomy for suitable patients with endometrial cancer. Robotics is preferable to laparoscopy due to a shorter hospital stay and lower conversion rate and preferable to vaginal/laparoscopy due to a reduced hospitalization.

AB - Introduction: Comparison of perioperative outcomes and recurrence in patients undergoing primary surgical treatment for endometrial cancer by robotics, laparoscopy, vaginal/laparoscopy, or laparotomy approaches. Methods: Prospective analysis of 67 patients undergoing robotic surgery for endometrial cancer between March 2004 and December 2007. Comparison was made with similar patients operated between November 1999 and December 2006 by laparoscopy (37 cases), laparotomy (99 cases) and vaginal/laparoscopy approach (vaginal hysterectomy, bilateral adnexectomy/laparoscopic lymphadenectomy) (47 cases) and matched by age, body mass index (BMI), histological type and International Federation of Gynecologists and Obstetricians (FIGO) staging. Results: Mean operating times for patients undergoing robotic, laparoscopy, vaginal/laparoscopy or laparotomy approach were 181.9, 189.5, 202.7 and 162.7 min, respectively (p = 0.006); mean blood loss was 141.4, 300.8, 300.0 and 472.6 ml, respectively (p < 0.001); mean number of nodes was 24.7, 27.1, 28.6, and 30.9, respectively (p = 0.008); mean length of hospital stay was 1.9, 3.4, 3.5 and 5.6 days, respectively (p < 0.001). There were no significant differences in intra- or postoperative complications among the four groups. The conversion rate was 2.9% for robotics and 10.8% for the laparoscopy group (0.001). There were no differences relative to recurrence rates among the four groups: 9%, 14%, 11% and 15% for robotics, laparoscopy, vaginal/laparoscopy, and laparotomy, respectively. Conclusion: Robotics, laparoscopy and vaginal/laparoscopy techniques are preferable to laparotomy for suitable patients with endometrial cancer. Robotics is preferable to laparoscopy due to a shorter hospital stay and lower conversion rate and preferable to vaginal/laparoscopy due to a reduced hospitalization.

KW - Endometrial cancer

KW - Laparoscopy

KW - Robotics

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=81255154197&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=81255154197&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

C2 - 22053656

AN - SCOPUS:81255154197

VL - 32

SP - 476

EP - 480

JO - European Journal of Gynaecological Oncology

JF - European Journal of Gynaecological Oncology

SN - 0392-2936

IS - 5

ER -