ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To compare surgical outcomes and cost of robotic single-site hysterectomy (RSSH) versus robotic multiport hysterectomy (RMPH) in early stage endometrial cancer. METHODS: This is a retrospective case-control study, comparing perioperative outcomes and costs of RSSH and RMPH in early stage endometrial cancer patients. RSSH were matched 1:2 according to age, body mass index, comorbidity, the International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetric (FIGO) stage, type of radical surgery, histologic type, and grading. Mean hospital cost per discharge was calculated summarizing the cost of daily hospital room charges, operating room, cost of supplies and length of hospital stay. RESULTS: A total of 23 women who underwent RSSH were matched with 46 historic controls treated by RMPH in the same institute, with the same surgical team. No significant differences were found in terms of age, histologic type, stage, and grading. Operative time was similar: 102.5 minutes in RMPH and 110 in RSSH (p=0.889). Blood loss was lower in RSSH than in RMPH (respectively, 50 mL vs. 100 mL, p=0.001). Hospital stay was 3 days in RMPH and 2 days in RSSH (p=0.001). No intraoperative complications occurred in both groups. Early postoperative complications were 2.2% in RMPH and 4.3% in RSSH. Overall cost was higher in RMPH than in RSSH (respectively, $7,772.15 vs. $5,181.06). CONCLUSION: Our retrospective study suggests the safety and feasibility of RSSH for staging early endometrial cancer without major differences from the RMPH in terms of surgical outcomes, but with lower hospital costs. Certainly, further studies are eagerly warranted to confirm our findings.
Subject(s)
Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Female , Humans , Middle Aged , Case-Control Studies , Endometrial Neoplasms/economics , Health Care Costs , Hysterectomy/adverse effects , Postoperative Complications/epidemiology , Retrospective Studies , Robotic Surgical Procedures/adverse effectsABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To compare surgical outcomes and cost of robotic single-site hysterectomy (RSSH) versus robotic multiport hysterectomy (RMPH) in early stage endometrial cancer. METHODS: This is a retrospective case-control study, comparing perioperative outcomes and costs of RSSH and RMPH in early stage endometrial cancer patients. RSSH were matched 1:2 according to age, body mass index, comorbidity, the International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetric (FIGO) stage, type of radical surgery, histologic type, and grading. Mean hospital cost per discharge was calculated summarizing the cost of daily hospital room charges, operating room, cost of supplies and length of hospital stay. RESULTS: A total of 23 women who underwent RSSH were matched with 46 historic controls treated by RMPH in the same institute, with the same surgical team. No significant differences were found in terms of age, histologic type, stage, and grading. Operative time was similar: 102.5 minutes in RMPH and 110 in RSSH (p=0.889). Blood loss was lower in RSSH than in RMPH (respectively, 50 mL vs. 100 mL, p=0.001). Hospital stay was 3 days in RMPH and 2 days in RSSH (p=0.001). No intraoperative complications occurred in both groups. Early postoperative complications were 2.2% in RMPH and 4.3% in RSSH. Overall cost was higher in RMPH than in RSSH (respectively, $7,772.15 vs. $5,181.06). CONCLUSION: Our retrospective study suggests the safety and feasibility of RSSH for staging early endometrial cancer without major differences from the RMPH in terms of surgical outcomes, but with lower hospital costs. Certainly, further studies are eagerly warranted to confirm our findings.
Subject(s)
Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Female , Humans , Middle Aged , Case-Control Studies , Endometrial Neoplasms/economics , Health Care Costs , Hysterectomy/adverse effects , Postoperative Complications/epidemiology , Retrospective Studies , Robotic Surgical Procedures/adverse effectsABSTRACT
AIM: The study objectives were evaluation of clinicopathological characteristics, correlations between the preoperative and postoperative tumor grades, and their implications on lymph node metastasis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a retrospective descriptive study of 131 cases of endometrial cancer examined and treated at a tertiary regional cancer institute between the years 2003 and 2009. We reviewed the oncology database as well as the clinical records and surgico‑pathological registry of all these patients. STATISTICAL METHODS USED: All the summary measure computation and Chi‑square test for comparing more than one proportion was done in spreadsheet (Excel). RESULTS: The multiparity association with endometrial cancer was commonly seen 113/131 (86.2%). Twelve (9.7%) patients preoperatively diagnosed as Grade 1 tumors upgraded to Grade 3 changes in postoperative specimens and six of these 12 patients (50%) had lymph node metastasis. A total of 14/131 (10.6%) cases had lymph nodes metastasis. CONCLUSIONS: There is a poor correlation between the preoperative and the postoperative tumor grades. Routine pelvic lymphadenectomy may be a valuable method in low‑risk cases and para‑aortic lymphadenectomy may be limited to high‑risk endometrial cancers.