Integration of robotics into two established programs of minimally invasive surgery for endometrial cancer appears to decrease surgical complications

Robotic approach for the treatment of gynecological cancers recurrences: A ten-year single-institution experience

INTRODUCTION

Although the management of gynecological cancers recurrences may be challenging, due to the heterogeneity of recurrent disease, the aim of this work is to present a descriptive analysis of gynecological malignancies recurrences in our institution treated by robotic approach.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We performed a retrospective review and analysis of data of patients who underwent robotic surgery for recurrent gynecological malignancies at Catholic University of the Sacred Hearth, Rome, from January 2013 to January 2024.

RESULTS

A total of 54 patients underwent successful robotic cytoreductive surgery. The median age was 63 years; the median BMI was 33 kg/m2 and most of the patients (59 %) were obese. In 12 cases (22 %) the relapse presented was the second or third relapse. The most frequent patterns of recurrence were represented by lymph nodes (41 %), followed by peritoneal (26 %), pelvic (22 %) and parenchymal (11 %). In all patients complete cytoreduction was achieved. In 29 patients (54 %) the surgical field was previous treated. The median operative time and estimated blood loss were, respectively, 270 min and 100 ml. There were 2 intraoperative complications, managed endoscopically; 10 early postoperative complications, and 3 late postoperative complications. The 2-year progression-free-survival and overall survival were, respectively, 39.8 % and 72.3 %.

CONCLUSION

Robotic approach in the treatment of recurrent gynecological cancers should be considered in selected patients with oligometastatic disease, in high-volume centers with expert surgeons, particularly in obese patients.

Influence of steep Trendelenburg position on postoperative complications: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Intraoperative physiologic changes related to the steep Trendelenburg position have been investigated with the widespread adoption of robot-assisted pelvic surgery (RAPS). However, the impact of the steep Trendelenburg position on postoperative complications remains unclear. We conducted a meta-analysis to compare RAPS to laparoscopic/open pelvic surgery with regards to the rates of venous thromboembolism (VTE), cardiac, and cerebrovascular complications. Meta-regression was performed to evaluate the influence of confounding risk factors. Ten randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 47 non-randomized controlled studies (NRSs), with a total of 380,125 patients, were included. Although RAPS was associated with a decreased risk of VTE and cardiac complications compared to laparoscopic/open pelvic surgery in NRSs [risk ratio (RR), 0.59; 95% CI 0.51–0.72, p < 0.001 and RR 0.93; 95% CI 0.58–1.50, p = 0.78, respectively], these differences were not confirmed in RCTs (RR 0.92; 95% CI 0.52–1.62, p = 0.77 and RR 0.93; 95% CI 0.58–1.50, p = 0.78, respectively). In subgroup analyses of laparoscopic surgery, there was no significant difference in the risk of VTE and cardiac complications in both RCTs and NRSs. In the meta-regression, none of the risk factors were found to be associated with heterogeneity. Furthermore, no significant difference was observed in cerebrovascular complications between RAPS and laparoscopic/open pelvic surgery. Our meta-analysis suggests that the steep Trendelenburg position does not seem to affect postoperative complications and, therefore, can be considered safe with regard to the risk of VTE, cardiac, and cerebrovascular complications. However, proper individualized preventive measures should still be implemented during all surgeries including RAPS to warrant patient safety.

Design and Performance Testing of a Novel In Vivo Laparoscope Lens Cleaning Device

A common tool for diagnosis and treatment of gastrointestinal, gynecologic, and other anatomical pathologies is a form of minimally invasive surgery known as laparoscopy. Roughly 4 × 106 laparoscopic surgeries are performed in the U.S. every year, with an estimated 15 × 106 globally. During surgeries, lens clarity often becomes impaired via (1) condensation or (2) smearing of bodily fluids and tissues. The current gold standard solution requires scope removal from the body for cleaning, offering opportunity for decreased surgical safety and efficiency, while simultaneously generating mounting frustration for the operating room team. A novel lens cleaning device was designed and developed to clean a laparoscope lens in vivo during surgery. Benchtop experiments in a warm body simulated environment allowed quantification of lens cleaning efficacy for several lens contaminants. Image analysis techniques detected the differences between original (clean), postdebris, and postcleaning images. Mechanical testing was also executed to determine safety levels regarding potential misuse scenarios. Compared to gold standard device technologies, the novel lens cleaning device prototype showed strong performance and ability to clear a laparoscope lens of debris while mitigating the need for scope removal from the simulated surgical cavity. Mechanical testing results also suggest the design also holds inherently strong safety performance. Both objective metrics and subjective observation suggests the novel design holds promise to improve safety and efficiency during laparoscopic surgery.

Surgical outcomes of conventional laparoscopic and robotic-assisted hysterectomy

INTRODUCTION

The aim of the present study was to compare surgical outcomes of total laparoscopic hysterectomy with those of the robotic approach using the da Vinci Xi system.

METHODS

Patients who underwent hysterectomy with da Vinci Xi for early endometrial cancer or benign indications from 2018 to 2019 were selected. The control group consisted of patients who underwent conventional laparoscopy.

RESULTS

A total of 300 patients were included in the study. The mean duration of surgery differed significantly (p = 0.025) between those who underwent laparoscopy (125.01 ± 76.168) and robotic-assisted surgery (142.96 ± 82.657 min). Blood loss, median hospital stay, intraoperative and postoperative complications were similar in both groups. No statistical difference was observed in the subgroups with a body mass index of more than 30 kg/m² or more than 40 kg/m² concerning the duration of surgery or the surgical outcome.

CONCLUSION

The da Vinci Xi did not improve surgical outcomes in patients who underwent hysterectomy by trained laparoscopists and takes more time than conventional laparoscopy when performed in patients of normal weight.

Robot-assisted surgery for women with endometrial cancer: Surgical and oncologic outcomes within a Belgium gynaecological oncology group cohort

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate surgical and oncologic outcomes of patients treated by robot-assisted surgery for endometrial cancer within the Belgium Gynaecological Oncology Group (BGOG).

STUDY DESIGN

We performed a retrospective analysis of women with clinically Stage I endometrial cancer who underwent surgical treatment from 2007 to 2018 in five institutions of the BGOG group.

RESULTS

A total of 598 consecutive women were identified. The rate of conversion to laparotomy was low (0.8%). The mean postoperative Complication Common Comprehensive Index (CCI) score was 3.4. The rate of perioperative complications did not differ between age groups, however the disease-free survival was significantly lower in patients over 75 years compared to patients under 65 years of age (p=0.008). Per-operative complications, conversion to laparotomy rate, post-operative hospital stay, CCI score and disease-free survival were not impacted by increasing BMI.

CONCLUSION

Robot-assisted surgery for the surgical treatment of patients suffering from early-stage endometrial cancer is associated with favourable surgical and oncologic outcomes, particularly for unfavourable groups such as elderly and obese women, thus permitting a low morbidity minimally-invasive surgical approach for the majority of patients in expert centres.

Robotic Surgery in Gynecology

The robotic-assisted laparoscopic surgical approach has improved complex gynecologic surgeries. It has the advantages of excellent visualization through the high-resolution 3-dimensional view, a wrist-like motion of the robotic arms and improved ergonomics. Similar to conventional laparoscopic surgeries, it is associated with a decrease in long-term surgical morbidity, early recovery and return to work, and improved esthetics. We discuss preoperative planning, surgical techniques, and some of the latest clinical results of robotic-assisted laparoscopic gynecologic surgery.

Infectious complications of laparoscopic and robotic hysterectomy: a systematic literature review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

We performed a systematic review of the literature and meta-analysis of the infectious complications of hysterectomy, comparing robotic-assisted hysterectomy to conventional laparoscopic-assisted hysterectomy.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, CINAHL, CDSR, and EMBASE through July 2018 for studies evaluating robotic-assisted hysterectomy, laparoscopic-assisted hysterectomy, and infectious complications. We employed random-effect models to obtain pooled OR estimates. Heterogeneity was evaluated with I² estimation and the Cochran Q statistic. Pooled ORs were calculated separately based on the reason for hysterectomy (eg, benign uterine diseases, endometrial cancer, and cervical cancer).

RESULTS

Fifty studies were included in the final review for the meta-analysis with 176 016 patients undergoing hysterectomy. There was no statistically significant difference in the number of infectious complication events between robotic-assisted hysterectomy and laparoscopic-assisted hysterectomy (pooled OR 0.97; 95 % CI 0.74 to 1.28). When we performed a stratified analysis, similar results were found with no statistically significant difference in infectious complications comparing robotic-assisted hysterectomy to laparoscopic-assisted hysterectomy among patients with benign uterine disease (pooled OR 1.10; 95 % CI 0.70 to 1.73), endometrial cancer (pooled OR 0.97; 95 % CI 0.55 to 1.73), or cervical cancer (pooled OR 1.09; 95 % CI 0.60 to 1.97).

CONCLUSION

In our meta-analysis the rate of infectious complications associated with robotic-assisted hysterectomy was no different than that associated with conventional laparoscopic-assisted hysterectomy.

Minimally Invasive Surgery to Treat Gynecological Cancer: Conventional Laparoscopy and/or Robot-Assisted Surgery

Robotic-assisted surgery is a technological advancement derived from conventional laparoscopy, which facilitates the application of minimally invasive techniques for complex operations in the field of gynecological oncology. However, its introduction in gynecological cancer has been scarce in most hospitals worldwide. Most publications on robotic surgery are still retrospective or descriptive in nature. Some studies compare robotic-assisted laparoscopy with open procedures, which is a questionable analysis, because the advantages of minimally invasive surgery have been already well established. Robotic surgery should be directly compared with conventional laparoscopy to determine whether its additional direct and indirect costs are in accordance with some improvements within patient clinical outcomes. On the other hand, the role of robotic-assisted surgery in allowing more patients to receive the benefits of the minimally invasive approach should also be considered. The objective of this article was, therefore, to review the literature regarding the role of conventional and robotic-assisted laparoscopy to treat women with gynecologic cancer.

A comparison of operative outcomes between standard and robotic laparoscopic surgery for endometrial cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Evidence has been systematically assessed comparing robotic with standard laparoscopy for treatment of endometrial cancer.

METHODS

A search of Medline, Embase and Cochrane databases was performed until 30th October 2016.

RESULTS

Thirty-six papers including 33 retrospective studies, two matched case-control studies and one randomized controlled study were used in a meta-analysis. Information from a further seven registry/database studies were assessed descriptively. There were no differences in the duration of surgery but days stay in hospital were shorter in the robotic arm (0.46 days, 95%CI 0.26 to 0.66). A robotic approach had less blood loss (57.74 mL, 95%CI 38.29 to 77.20), less conversions to laparotomy (RR = 0.41, 95%CI 0.29 to 0.59), and less overall complications (RR = 0.82, 95%CI 0.72 to 0.93). A robotic approach had higher costs ($1746.20, 95%CI $63.37 to $3429.03).

CONCLUSION

A robotic approach has favourable clinical outcomes but is more expensive.

Comparison of three surgical approaches for staging lymphadenectomy in high-risk endometrial cancer

OBJECTIVE

To compare laparotomy, laparoscopy, and robotic surgical approaches to lymphadenectomy for high-risk endometrial cancer staging.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study enrolled patients who underwent surgery for pathologic high-risk endometrial carcinoma at the University Health Network, Toronto, Canada, between January 1, 2005 and December 31, 2013. The primary outcome, the median number of nodes retrieved, was compared based on surgical technique. The secondary outcome was the detection of metastatic nodes.

RESULTS

A total of 176 patients who underwent surgery for high-risk endometrial cancer were included, of whom 147 (83.5%) had pelvic and 78 (44.3%) had para-aortic lymphadenectomy. Laparotomy, laparoscopy, and robotic approaches were applied for 69 (39.2%), 44 (25.0%), and 63 (35.8%) patients, respectively. Minimally-invasive staging was associated with an increased proportion of patients undergoing pelvic lymphadenectomy compared with laparotomy (P=0.005). The median number of nodes removed in the pelvis and para-aortic regions did not differ between surgical approaches. The detection of metastatic nodes was also similar between the groups. Increased blood loss (P<0.001) and longer hospital admission (P<0.001) were observed with laparotomy procedures.

CONCLUSION

All three techniques demonstrated adequate staging of high-risk endometrial carcinoma. Based on improved peri-operative outcomes, the use of minimally-invasive techniques is advocated where appropriate.

Bowel injury in robotic gynecologic surgery: risk factors and management options. A systematic review

OBJECTIVE

We sought to analyze the published literature on bowel injuries in patients undergoing gynecologic robotic surgery with the aim to determine its incidence, predisposing factors, and treatment options.

DATA SOURCES

Studies included in this analysis were identified by searching PubMed Central, OVID Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases. References for all studies were also reviewed. Time frame for data analysis spanned from November 2001 through December 2014.

STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

All English-language studies reporting the incidence of bowel injury or complications during robotic gynecologic surgery were included. Studies with data duplication, not in English, case reports, or studies that did not explicitly define bowel injury incidence were excluded.

STUDY APPRAISAL AND SYNTHESIS METHODS

The Guidelines for Meta-Analyses and Systematic Reviews of Observational Studies were used to complete the systematic review with the exception of scoring study quality and a single primary reviewer.

RESULTS

In all, 370 full-text articles were reviewed and 144 met the inclusion criteria. There were 84 bowel injuries recorded in 13,444 patients for an incidence of 1 in 160 (0.62%; 95% confidence interval, 0.50-0.76%). There were no significant differences in incidence of bowel injury by procedure type. The anatomic location of injury, etiology, and management were rarely reported. Of the bowel injuries, 87% were recognized intraoperatively and the majority (58%) managed via a minimally invasive approach. Of 13,444 patients, 3 (0.02%) (95% confidence interval, 0.01-0.07%) died in the immediate postoperative period and no deaths were a result of a bowel injury.

CONCLUSION

The overall incidence of bowel injury in robotic-assisted gynecologic surgery is 1 in 160. When the location of bowel injuries were specified, they most commonly occurred in the colon and rectum and most were managed via a minimally invasive approach.

Clinical comparison of robotic, laparoscopic, and open hysterectomy procedures for endometrial cancer patients

The goal of this study was to compare outcomes for robotic, laparoscopic, and open hysterectomy procedures for endometrial cancer as well as to investigate whether specific patient demographic, comorbidity, and severity variables were associated with the type of hysterectomy performed. A retrospective review was conducted of hysterectomy procedures for patients discharged from October 1, 2008 and September 30, 2012. Preoperative characteristics included age, BMI, number of past abdominal surgeries, and comorbidities. Intraoperative and postoperative characteristics included uterine weight and diameter, American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status classification, lymph-vascular space involvement, FIGO stage and tumor grade. Outcomes included operative time, estimated blood loss, length of stay, conversion to open, other intraoperative and postoperative complications, readmissions within 30 days and lymph node yield. The robotic and laparoscopic cohorts show no significant differences in patient or tumor characteristics, while the open cases represent patients with increased complexity. In general, laparoscopic cases were shorter than robotic and open cases. Laparoscopic cases had fewer conversions to open than robotic cases. Robotic and open cases had significantly higher lymph node yield than laparoscopic cases. The reduction in surgical time and conversion rates in the laparoscopic cohort may be related to the reduction in node dissection performed.

Robotic-assisted vs traditional laparoscopic surgery for endometrial cancer: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Previous studies comparing robotic-assisted laparoscopic surgery to traditional laparoscopic or open surgery in gynecologic oncology have been retrospective. To our knowledge, no prospective randomized trials have thus far been performed on endometrial cancer.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to prospectively compare traditional and robotic-assisted laparoscopic surgery for endometrial cancer.

STUDY DESIGN

This was a randomized controlled trial. From December 2010 through October 2013, 101 endometrial cancer patients were randomized to hysterectomy, bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy, and pelvic lymphadenectomy either by robotic-assisted laparoscopic surgery or by traditional laparoscopy. The primary outcome measure was overall operation time. The secondary outcome measures included total time spent in the operating room, and surgical outcome (number of lymph nodes harvested, complications, and recovery). The study was powered to show at least a 25% difference in the operation time using 2-sided significance level of .05. The differences between the traditional laparoscopy and the robotic surgery groups were tested by Pearson χ² test, Fisher exact test, or Mann-Whitney test.

RESULTS

In all, 99 patients were eligible for analysis. The median operation time in the traditional laparoscopy group (n = 49) was 170 (range 126-259) minutes and in the robotic surgery group (n = 50) was 139 (range 86-197) minutes, respectively (P < .001). The total time spent in the operating room was shorter in the robotic surgery group (228 vs 197 minutes, P < .001). In the traditional laparoscopy group, there were 5 conversions to laparotomy vs none in the robotic surgery group (P = .027). There were no differences as to the number of lymph nodes removed, bleeding, or the length of postoperative hospital stay. Four (8%) vs no (0%) patients (P = .056) had intraoperative complications and 5 (10%) vs 11 (22%) (P = .111) had major postoperative complications in the traditional and robotic surgery groups, respectively.

CONCLUSION

In patients with endometrial cancer, robotic-assisted laparoscopic surgery was faster to perform than traditional laparoscopy. Also total time spent in the operation room was shorter in the robotic surgery group and all conversions to laparotomy occurred in the traditional laparoscopy group. Otherwise, the surgical outcome was similar between the groups. Robotic surgery offers an effective and safe alternative in the surgical treatment of endometrial cancer.

Robot-assisted hysterectomy for endometrial and cervical cancers: a systematic review

Total and radical hysterectomies are the most common treatment strategies for early-stage endometrial and cervical cancers, respectively. Surgical modalities include open surgery, laparoscopy, and more recently, minimally invasive robot-assisted surgery. We searched several electronic databases for randomized controlled trials and observational studies with a comparison group, published between 2009 and 2014. Our outcomes of interest included both perioperative and morbidity outcomes. We included 35 observational studies in this review. We did not find any randomized controlled trials. The quality of evidence for all reported outcomes was very low. For women with endometrial cancer, we found that there was a reduction in estimated blood loss between the robot-assisted surgery compared to both laparoscopy and open surgery. There was a reduction in length of hospital stay between robot-assisted surgery and open surgery but not laparoscopy. There was no difference in total lymph node removal between the three modalities. There was no difference in the rate of overall complications between the robot-assisted technique and laparoscopy. For women with cervical cancer, there were no differences in estimated blood loss or removal of lymph nodes between robot-assisted and laparoscopic procedure. Compared to laparotomy, robot-assisted hysterectomy for cervical cancer showed an overall reduction in estimated blood loss. Although robot-assisted hysterectomy is clinically effective for the treatment of both endometrial and cervical cancers, methodologically rigorous studies are lacking to draw definitive conclusions.

Robot-assisted surgery versus conventional laparoscopic surgery for endometrial cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

To compare perioperative outcomes between robot-assisted surgery (RAS) and conventional laparoscopic surgery (CLS) for the treatment of endometrial cancer by conducting a meta-analysis.

METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, PubMed, and EMBASE up to January 8, 2016. Studies clearly documenting a comparison between RAS and CLS for patients with endometrial cancer were included. The perioperative outcomes of interest included intraoperative visceral injuries, postoperative complications, operation time, estimated blood loss (EBL), blood transfusion, total lymph nodes harvested (TLNH), conversion to laparotomy, and length of hospital stay. The weighted mean difference (WMD) and odds ratio (OR) were pooled with either a fixed-effects or a random-effects model.

RESULTS

A total of 19 studies were included in the analysis, involving 3056 patients. The pooled analysis showed that RAS was associated with lower EBL (WMD -77.65; 95 % confidence interval [CI] -105.58 to -49.72), lower conversion rate (OR 0.29; 95 % CI 0.18-0.46), and shorter hospital stay (WMD -0.48; 95 % CI -0.70 to -0.26) compared to CLS. The incidence of intraoperative visceral injuries, operation time, transfusion rate, and TLNH showed no significant differences between RAS and CLS.

CONCLUSIONS

RAS is a feasible and effective surgical approach that may be superior to CLS for the treatment of endometrial cancer, with lower EBL and lower conversion rate. Further prospective randomized trials are required to validate our findings.

Robotic Single-Site and Conventional Laparoscopic Surgery in Gynecology: Clinical Outcomes and Cost Analysis of a Matched Case-Control Study

STUDY OBJECTIVE

To assess the clinical outcomes and costs associated with robotic single-site (RSS) surgery compared with those of conventional laparoscopy (CL) in gynecology.

DESIGN

Retrospective case-control study (Canadian Task Force classification II-2).

SETTING

University-affiliated community hospital.

PATIENTS

Female patients undergoing RSS or CL gynecologic procedures.

INTERVENTIONS

Comparison of consecutive RSS gynecologic procedures (cases) undertaken between October 2013 and March 2014 with matched CL procedures (controls) completed during the same time period by the same surgeon.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Patient demographic data, operative data, and hospital financial data were abstracted from the electronic charts and financial systems. An incremental cost analysis based on the use of disposable equipment was performed. Total hospital charges were determined for matched RSS cases vs CL cases. RSS surgery was completed in 25 out of 33 attempts; 3 cases were aborted before docking, and 5 were converted to a multisite surgery. There were no intraoperative complications or conversions to laparotomy. The completed cases included 11 adnexal cases and 14 hysterectomies, 3 of which included pelvic lymph node dissection. Compared with the CL group, total operative times were higher in the RSS group; however, there were no significant between-group differences in estimated blood loss, length of hospital stay, or complication rates. Disposable equipment cost per case, direct costs, and total hospital charges were evaluated. RSS was associated with an increased disposable cost per case of $248 to $378, depending on the method used for vaginal cuff closure. The average total hospital charges for matched outpatient adnexal surgery were $15,450 for the CL controls and $18,585 for the RSS cases (p < .001), and the average total hospital charges for matched outpatient benign hysterectomy were $14,623 for the CL controls and $21,412 for the RSS cases (p < .001).

CONCLUSION

Although RSS surgery and CL have comparable clinical outcomes in selected patients, RSS surgery remains associated with increased incremental disposable cost per case and total hospital charges. Careful case selection and judicious use of equipment are necessary to maximize cost-effectiveness in RSS gynecologic surgery.

Application of da Vinci(®) Robot in simple or radical hysterectomy: Tips and tricks

The first robotic simple hysterectomy was performed more than 10 years ago. These days, robotic-assisted hysterectomy is accepted as an alternative surgical approach and is applied both in benign and malignant surgical entities. The two important points that should be taken into account to optimize postoperative outcomes in the early period of a surgeon's training are how to achieve optimal oncological and functional results. Overcoming any technical challenge, as with any innovative surgical method, leads to an improved surgical operation timewise as well as for patients' safety. The standardization of the technique and recognition of critical anatomical landmarks are essential for optimal oncological and clinical outcomes on both simple and radical robotic-assisted hysterectomy. Based on our experience, our intention is to present user-friendly tips and tricks to optimize the application of a da Vinci® robot in simple or radical hysterectomies.

Corneal abrasion in hysterectomy and prostatectomy: role of laparoscopic and robotic assistance

BACKGROUND

Radical prostatectomy (RP) is most commonly performed laparoscopically with a robot (robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy, R/PROST). Hysterectomy, which may be open hysterectomy (O/HYST) or laparoscopic hysterectomy (L/HYST), has been increasingly frequently done via robot (R/HYST). Small case series suggest increased corneal abrasions (CAs) with less invasive techniques.

METHODS

The authors identified RP (166,942), O/HYST (583,298), or L/HYST (216,890) discharges with CA in the Nationwide Inpatient Sample (2000-2011). For 2009-2011, they determined odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for CA, in R/PROST, non-R/PROST, L/HYST, O/HYST, and R/HYST. Uni- and multivariate models studied CA risk depending on surgical procedure, age, race, year, chronic illness, and malignancy.

RESULTS

In 2000-2011, 0.18% RP, 0.13% L/HYST, and 0.03% O/HYST sustained CA. Compared with 17,554 non-R/PROSTs (34 abrasions, 0.19%) in 2009-2011, OR was not significantly higher in 28,521 R/PROSTs (99, 0.35%; OR 1.508; CI 0.987 to 2.302; P < 0.057). CA significantly increased in L/HYST (70/51,323; 0.136%) versus O/HYST (70/191,199; 0.037%; OR 3.821; CI 2.594 to 5.630; P < 0.0001), further increasing in R/HYST (63/21, 213; 0.297%; OR 6.505; CI 4.323 to 9.788; P < 0.0001). For hysterectomy, risk of CA increased with age (OR 1.020; CI 1.007 to 1.034; P < 0.003) and number of chronic conditions (OR 1.139; CI 1.065 to 1.219; P < 0.0001). CA risk was likewise elevated in R/HYST with number of chronic conditions. Being African American significantly decreased CA risk in R/PROST and in R/HYST or L/HYST.

CONCLUSIONS

L/HYST increased CA nearly four-fold, and R/HYST approximately 6.5-fold versus O/HYST. Identifiable preoperative factors are associated with either increased risk (age, chronic conditions) or decreased risk (race).

Introducing robotic surgery into an endometrial cancer service--a prospective evaluation of clinical and economic outcomes in a UK institution

Background

We have assessed how the introduction of robotics in a publicly funded endometrial cancer service affects clinical and economic outcomes.

Methods

The study included 196 women. Costs were divided into those for wards, high dependency, staffing, theatres, pharmacy, blood products, imaging, pathology and rehabilitation. Capital depreciation was included.

Results

Prior to the introduction of robotics, 78/130 (60.0%) cases were performed open, compared to 17/66 (25.8%) afterwards ( p < 0.0001). The median operative time increased 37 min (95% CI 17–55 min; p = 0.0002); the median blood loss was 55 ml lower (95% CI 0–150 ml; p = 0.0181); the stay was 2 days shorter (95% CI 1–3; p < 0.0001). Complications reduced from 64/130 (49.2%) to 19/66 (28.8%) ( p = 0.0045). Costs reduced from £11 476 to £10 274 ( p = 0.0065). Conversions for 'straight stick' surgery were 18.2% (14/77) compared to 0.0% (0/24) for robotics ( p = 0.0164).

Conclusions

Introducing robotics resulted in fewer laparotomies, shorter stays, fewer complications and lower costs. © 2015 The Authors. The International Journal of Medical Robotics and Computer Assisted Surgery Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Long-term survival outcome of laparoscopic staging surgery for endometrial cancer in Taiwanese experience

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to evaluate the long-term safety and efficacy of laparoscopic staging surgery (LSS) for endometrial cancer in Taiwanese women.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This is a longitudinal study of prospectively registered 105 patients who underwent LSS for endometrial cancer between June 1995 and June 2008.

RESULTS

The mean duration of surgery was 186.8 minutes, and the mean intraoperative blood loss was 220.38 mL. The median number of retrieved pelvic lymph nodes was 18. The intraoperative complication rate was 4.8%, including two cases of ureteral injury and one case each of bladder injury, bowel injury, and vascular injury. No patient required conversion to laparotomy. During the median follow-up of 55.3 months, six cases of recurrence (5.7%) and three tumor-related deaths (2.9%) were recorded. The 5-year disease-free survival and the overall survival were 93.39% and 98.05%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

The study revealed favorable perioperative outcomes and better long-term survival than reported in the Taiwan Cancer Registry, and similar good surgical results to those reported in the Western studies. Therefore, LSS by experienced surgeons for endometrial cancer is a feasible and efficacious alternative to laparotomy.

Implementation of a robotic surgical program in gynaecological oncology and comparison with prior laparoscopic series

Background. Robotic surgery in gynaecological oncology is a rapidly developing field as it offers several technical advantages over conventional laparoscopy. An audit was performed on the outcome of robotic surgery during our learning curve and compared with recent well-established laparoscopic procedure data. Method. Following acquisition of the da Vinci Surgical System (Intuitive Surgical, Inc., Sunnyvale, California, USA), we prospectively analysed all cases performed over the first six months by one experienced gynaecologist who had been appropriately trained and mentored. Data on age, BMI, pathology, surgery type, blood loss, morbidity, return to theatre, hospital stay, and readmission rate were collected and compared with a consecutive series over the preceding 6 months performed laparoscopically by the same team. Results. A comparison of two consecutive series was made. The mean age was somewhat different, 55 years in the robotic versus 69 years in the laparoscopic group, but obesity was a feature of both groups with a mean of BMI 29.3 versus 28.06, respectively. This difference was not statistically significant (P = 0.54). Three subgroups of minimal access surgical procedures were performed: total hysterectomy and bilateral salpingooophorectomy (TH + BSO), total hysterectomy and bilateral salpingooophorectomy plus bilateral pelvic lymphadenectomy (TH + BSO + BPLND), and radical hysterectomy plus bilateral pelvic lymphadenectomy (RH + BPLND). The mean time taken to perform surgery for TH + BSO was longer in the robotic group, 151.2 min compared to 126.3 min in the laparoscopic group. TH + BSO + BPLND surgical time was similar to 178.3 min in robotic group and 176.5 min in laparoscopic group. RH + BPLND surgical time was similar, 263.6 min (robotic arm) and 264.0 min (laparoscopic arm). However, the numbers in this initial analysis were small especially in the last two subgroups and do not allow for statistical analysis. The rate of complications necessitating intervention (Clavien-Dindo classification grade 2/3) was higher in the robotic arm (22.7%) compared to the laparoscopic approach (4.5%). The readmission rate was higher in the robotic group (18.2%) compared to the laparoscopic group (4.5%). The return to theatre in the robotic group was 18.2% and 4.5% in laparoscopic group. Uncomplicated robotic surgery hospital stay appeared to be shorter, 1.3 days compared to the uncomplicated laparoscopic group, 2.5 days. There was no conversion to the open procedure in either arm. Estimated blood loss in all cases was less than 100 mL in both groups. Conclusion. Robotic surgery is comparable to laparoscopic surgery in blood loss; however, the hospital stay in uncomplicated cases appears to be longer in the laparoscopic arm. Surgical robotic time is equivalent to laparoscopic in complex cases but may be longer in cases not requiring lymph node dissection. The robotic surgery team learning curve may be associated with higher rate of morbidity. Further research on the benefits to the surgeon is needed to clarify the whole picture of this versatile novel surgical approach.

Comparing Robotic Surgery With Conventional Laparoscopy and Laparotomy for Cervical Cancer Management

Objective

The aim of this study was to compare the outcomes of robotic surgery, laparoscopy, and laparotomy for the surgical treatment of stage IA to IIB cervical cancer.

Methods

This retrospective study was carried out in a university-affiliated teaching hospital. A total of 100 women with an initial diagnosis of stage IA to IIB cervical cancer, without preoperative brachytherapy or chemotherapy, were included in this study. With selection of the cases, 44 patients received laparotomy surgery, 32 patients received laparoscopic surgery, and 24 patients received robotic surgery. The perioperative parameters measured included operation time, blood loss, transfusion rate, lymph node yield, adhesion score, laparotomy conversion rate, postoperative and 24-hour pain scores, time to full diet resumption, and hospital stay. The perioperative complication and disease-free survival were also evaluated.

Results

The robotic group showed a shorter operation time, less blood loss, lower transfusion rate, and lower laparotomy conversion rate than the laparoscopic or laparotomy group. As for the postoperative parameters, the robotic group showed reduced postoperative and 24-hour pain scores, shortened length of hospital stay, and decreased time to full diet resumption compared with the other 2 surgical groups. No significant differences were found between the groups in perioperative complication rate or disease-free survival.

Conclusions

The data suggested that robotic surgery is a feasible and potentially optimal option for the treatment of stage IA to IIB cervical cancer with favorable short-term surgical outcomes.

Conversion from robotic surgery to laparotomy: a case-control study evaluating risk factors for conversion

OBJECTIVES

To determine risk factors associated with conversion to laparotomy for women undergoing robotic gynecologic surgery.

METHODS

The medical records of 459 consecutive robotic surgery cases performed between December 2006 and October 2011 by 8 different surgeons at a single institution were retrospectively reviewed. Cases converted to laparotomy were compared to those completed robotically. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize the demographic and clinical characteristics.

RESULTS

Forty of 459 (8.7%, 95% CI 6.3%-11.7%) patients had conversion to open surgery. Reason for conversion included poor visualization due to adhesions (13), inability to tolerate Trendelenburg (7), enlarged uterus (7), extensive peritoneal disease (5), bowel injury (2), ureteral injury (1), vascular injury (1), bladder injury (1), technical difficulty with the robot (2), and inability to access abdominal cavity (1). 5% of cases were converted prior to docking the robot. On univariate analysis, preoperative diagnosis (p=0.012), non-White race (p=0.004), history of asthma (p=0.027), ASA score (p=0.032), bowel injury (p=0.012), greater BMI (p<0.001), need for blood transfusion (p<0.001), and expected blood loss (p<0.001) were associated with conversion. On multivariate analysis, non-White race (OR 2.88, 95% CI 1.39-5.96, p=0.004), bowel injury (OR 35.40, 95% CI 3.00-417.28, p=0.005), and increasing BMI (OR 1.06, 95% CI 1.03-1.09, p<0.001) were significantly associated with increased risk for conversion. Prior surgery was not associated with conversion to open surgery (p=0.347).

CONCLUSION

Conversion to laparotomy was required for 8.7% of patients undergoing robotic surgery for a gynecologic indication. Increasing BMI and non-white race were identified as the two preoperative risk factors associated with conversion.

Unintended consequences: surgical complications in gynecologic cancer

More than 91,000 women in the USA will be diagnosed with a gynecologic malignancy in 2013. Most will undergo surgery for staging, treatment or both. No therapeutic intervention is without consequence, therefore, it is imperative to understand the possible complications associated with the perioperative period before undertaking surgery. Complication rates are affected by a patient population that is increasingly older, more obese and more medically complicated. Surgical modalities consist of abdominal, vaginal, laparoscopic and robotic-assisted approaches, and also affect rates of complications. An understanding of the various approaches, patient characteristics and surgeon experience allow for individualized decision-making to minimize the complications after surgery for gynecologic cancer.

Contemporary clinical management of endometrial cancer

Although the contemporary management of endometrial cancer is straightforward in many ways, novel data has emerged over the past decade that has altered the clinical standards of care while generating new controversies that will require further investigation. Fortunately most cases are diagnosed at early stages, but high-risk histologies and poorly differentiated tumors have high metastatic potential with a significantly worse prognosis. Initial management typically requires surgery, but the role and extent of lymphadenectomy are debated especially with well-differentiated tumors. With the changes in surgical staging, prognosis correlates more closely with stage, and the importance of cytology has been questioned and is under evaluation. The roles of radiation in intermediate-risk patients and chemotherapy in high-risk patients are emerging. The therapeutic index of brachytherapy needs to be considered, and the best sequencing of combined modalities needs to balance efficacy and toxicities. Additionally novel targeted therapies show promise, and further studies are needed to determine the appropriate use of these new agents. Management of endometrial cancer will continue to evolve as clinical trials continue to answer unsolved clinical questions.