Surgical and oncological outcome of robotic surgery compared to laparoscopic and abdominal surgery in the management of endometrial cancer.

OBJECTIVE: To compare different techniques of minimally invasive surgery (laparoscopy and robotics) to abdominal surgery in order to identify the optimal surgical technique in the treatment of endometrial cancer. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A single-institutional, matched, retrospective, cohort study was performed. All patients with clinical stage I or occult stage II endometrial cancer who underwent robotic hysterectomy, bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy ± lymphadenectomy from August 2010 and December 2013 were identified. Surgical and oncological outcomes were compared with patients matched by age, body mass index, tumor histology, and grade, who underwent abdominal or laparoscopic surgery between January 2001 and December 2013. RESULTS: Three groups were identified: 177 laparotomies (group A), 277 laparoscopies (group B) and 72 robotics (group C). There were no statistically significant differences between the three groups in terms of age, BMI and FIGO stage. The operative time was shortest in group B (p = 0.0001). Blood loss and transfusions were equivalent in group B and C, while they were greater in group A (p = 0.0001). The intra-operative, early and late postoperative complications, rate of conversion, the re-intervention and median hospital stay were lower in group C. The rate of recurrence and death from disease was similar in all three groups. CONCLUSIONS: Minimally invasive surgery was superior to abdominal surgery in terms of surgical outcomes. Robotic surgery was superior to laparoscopy in terms of intra- and post-operative complications, conversion rates, length of hospital stay and re-interventions. In terms of oncological outcomes the three groups were equivalent.

Laparoscopic versus robotic radical hysterectomy after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in locally advanced cervical cancer: a case control study.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the surgical outcome of robotic radical hysterectomy (RRH) versus laparoscopic radical hysterectomy (LRH) for the treatment of locally advanced cervical cancer (LACC) after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT). MATERIALS AND METHODS: From August 1st 2010 to July 1st 2012 a prospective data collection of women undergoing RRH for cervical cancer stage FIGO IB2 to IIB, after neoadjuvant chemotherapy, was conducted at National Cancer Institute "Regina Elena" of Rome. All patients deemed operable underwent class C1 RRH with pelvic lymphadenectomy within 4 weeks from the last chemotherapy cycle. RESULTS: A total of 25 RRH were analyzed, and compared with 25 historic LRH cases. The groups did not differ significantly in body mass index, stage, histology, number of pelvic lymph nodes removed. The median operative time was the same in the two groups with 190 min respectively. The median estimated blood loss (EBL) was statistically significant in favor of RRH group. Median length of stay was shorter, for the RRH group (4 versus 6 days, P = 0.28). There was no significant difference in terms of intraoperative and postoperative complications between groups but in the RRH group we observed a greater number of total complications compared to the control group. CONCLUSION: This study shows that RRH is safe and feasible in LACC after NACT compare to LRH. However, a comparison of oncologic outcomes and cost-benefit analysis is still needed and it has to be carefully evaluated in the future.