For Cervical Cancer
Boggess JF, Gehrig PA, Cantrell L, Shafer A, Ridgway M, Skinner EN, Fowler WC. A case-control study of robot-assisted type III radical hysterectomy with pelvic lymph node dissection compared with open radical hysterectomy. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology 2008;199(4).
Objective: The purpose of this study was to compare robotically assisted hysterectomy (RAH) with open (ORH) type III radical hysterectomy in the treatment of early-stage cervical cancer. Study Design: The outcomes of 51 consecutive patients who underwent RAH were compared with the outcomes of 49 patients who underwent ORH. Results: There were no differences with regard to patient demographics. There were significant differences between the groups with regard to operative blood loss (P < .0001), operative time (P = .0002), and lymph node retrieval (P = .0003), all of which were in favor of the RAH cohort. All patients with RAH were discharged on postoperative day 1, compared with a 3.2-day average hospitalization for the cohort with ORH. The incidence of postoperative complications was 7.8% and 16.3% for the RAH and ORH cohorts, respectively (P = .35). Conclusion: Robotic type III radical hysterectomy with pelvic node dissection is feasible and may be preferable over open radical hysterectomy in patients with early-stage cervical cancer. Further study will determine procedure generalizability and long-term oncologic outcomes. 2008 Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.
Estape R, Lambrou N, Diaz R, Estape E, Dunkin N, Rivera A. A case matched analysis of robotic radical hysterectomy with lymphadenectomy compared with laparoscopy and laparotomy. Gynecologic Oncology. 2009. Jun;113(3):357-61.
Objective: To compare robotic radical hysterectomy to laparoscopic and radical abdominal hysterectomy in the treatment of cervical cancer. Methods: Prospective analyses of thirty-two consecutive patients undergoing robotic radical hysterectomy were compared to 17 patients undergoing laparoscopic radical hysterectomy and 14 patients undergoing radical abdominal hysterectomy. Results: Operative time for the robotic group was 2.4h 0.8 and not significantly different from the laparoscopic group at 2.2h 0.7, nor the laparotomy group (1.9h 0.6, p = 0.05). The estimated blood loss for patients undergoing robotic hysterectomy was 130cm3 119.4. This was significantly less than the laparotomy group (621.4mL 294.0, p < 0.0001), but not the laparoscopic group (209.4mL 169.9, p = 0.09). The robotic group had an average of 32.4 total nodes retrieved, as compared to 18.6 and 25.7 nodes retrieved in the laparoscopy and laparotomy cohorts, respectively. All differences were significant (p < 0.0001 and p < 0.05). Mean length of hospital stay was 2.6, 2.3 and 4.0days in the robotic, laparoscopic, and laparotomy cohorts respectively. The incidence of postoperative complications was less in the robotic cohort (18.8%) as compared to the laparoscopic (23.5%), and laparotomy cohorts (28.6%). Conclusions: Robotic total laparoscopic radical hysterectomy with pelvic and para-aortic lymphadenectomy is feasible and may be preferable over laparoscopic or radical abdominal hysterectomy. 2009 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Lowe MP, Chamberlain DH, Kamelle SA, Johnson PR, Tillmanns TD. A multi-institutional experience with robotic-assisted radical hysterectomy for early stage cervical cancer. Gynecol Oncol 2009 May;113(2):191-4. Epub 2009 Feb 26.
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of the study is to report a multi-institutional experience with robotic-assisted radical hysterectomy to treat patients with early stage cervical cancer with respect to perioperative outcomes. METHODS: A multi-institutional robotic surgical consortium consisting of five board-certified gynecologist oncologist in distinct geographical regions of the United States was created to evaluate the utility of robotics for gynecologic surgery (benign and malignant). Between April 2003 and August 2008, a total of 835 patients underwent robotic surgery for benign gynecologic disorders and/or gynecologic malignancies by a surgeon in the consortium. IRB approval was obtained and data was collected in a prospective fashion at each institution. For the purposes of the study, a multi-institutional HIPPA compliant database was then created for all patients that underwent robotic-assisted surgery between the April 2003 and August 2008. This database was queried for all patients who underwent a robotic-assisted type II or III radical hysterectomy for Stage IA1 (+vsi)-IB2 cervical carcinoma. Forty-two patients were identified. Records were then reviewed for demographic data, medical conditions, prior abdominal or pelvic surgeries, and follow-up. The perioperative outcomes analyzed included: operative time (skin-skin), estimated blood loss (EBL), length of hospital stay, total lymph node count, conversion to laparotomy, and operative complications. RESULTS: From a database of 835 patients who underwent robotic surgery by a gynecologic oncologist, a total of 42 patients who underwent a robotic-assisted type II (n=10) or type III (n=32) radical hysterectomy for early stage cervical cancer were identified. Demographic data demonstrated a median age of 41 and a median BMI of 25.1. With regard to stage, seven patients (17%) were Stage IA2, twenty-eight patients (67%) were Stage IB1 and six patients (14%) were Stage IB2. There was a single patient with Stage IA1 cervical cancer with vascular space invasion who underwent a type II radical hysterectomy. The overall median operative time was 215 min. The overall median estimated blood loss was 50 cc. No patient received a blood transfusion. The median lymph node count was 25. The median hospital stay was 1 day. Positive lymph nodes were detected in 12% of the patients. Pelvic radiotherapy or chemo-radiation was given to 14% of the patients based on final surgical pathology. Intraoperative complications occurred in 4.8% of the patients and included one conversion to laparotomy (2.4%) and one ureteral injury (2.4%). Postoperative complications were reported in 12% of the patients and included a DVT (2.4%), infection (7.2%), and bladder/urinary tract complication (2.4%) The conversion rate to laparotomy was 2.4%. CONCLUSIONS: Robotic-assisted radical hysterectomy is associated with minimal blood loss, a shortened hospital stay, and few operative complications. Operative time and lymph node yields are acceptable. This data suggests that robotic-assisted radical hysterectomy may offer an alternative to traditional radical hysterectomy. This series contributes to the growing literature on robotic-assisted radical hysterectomy and prospective comparisons with traditional radical hysterectomy are needed.
Obermair A, Gebski V, Frumovitz M, Soliman PT, Schmeler KM, Levenback C, Ramirez PT. A Phase III Randomized Clinical Trial Comparing Laparoscopic or Robotic Radical Hysterectomy with Abdominal Radical Hysterectomy in Patients with Early Stage Cervical Cancer. Journal of Minimally Invasive Gynecology 2008;15(5):584-8.
Study Objective: Cervical cancer is a significant health problem in countries of the developing world. Although case series suggest advantages of total laparoscopic radical hysterectomy (TLRH) compared with total abdominal radical hysterectomy (TARH), no randomized controlled trial is currently available to establish TLRH as the new standard treatment. In this study, TLRH or total robotic radical hysterectomy (TRRH) will be performed without a vaginally assisted portion of the procedure. Design: A biphasic randomized controlled trial was designed to test feasibility of recruitment and equivalence in regard to disease-free survival (Canadian Task Force classification I). Setting: Tertiary referral hospital. Patients: Patients with histologically confirmed invasive squamous cell carcinoma or adenocarcinoma of the cervix, stage IA1 (with lymphovascular space invasion), IA2, and IB1 are eligible. Interventions: During the first phase, 100 patients will be randomized (1:1) to receive either TLRH/TRRH or TARH, with the primary end point being the rate of enrollment. During the second phase, recruitment will be extended by another 640 patients in a 1:1 TLRH/TRRH:TARH allocation, to determine equivalence with respect to disease-free survival with 80% power and ? = 0.05. Measurements and Main Results: Equivalence will be assumed if the difference in disease-free survival does not exceed 7% at 4 years. Secondary outcomes include treatment-related morbidity, costs and cost effectiveness, patterns of recurrence, quality of life, pelvic floor function, feasibility of intraoperative sentinel node sampling, and overall survival. All data from this multicenter study will be entered using online electronic case report forms, allowing real-time assessment of data completeness and patient follow-up. Conclusion: This prospective trial aims to show the equivalence of a TLRH/TRRH versus TARH approach for patients with early stage cervical cancer following a 2-phase protocol. This trial was developed and designed with the input and approval of the members of the Gynecologic Oncology Committee from the American Association of Gynecologic Laparoscopists. 2008 AAGL.
Ramirez PT. Robotic radical hysterectomy: a new standard of care? Future Oncol2009 Feb;5(1):23-5.
While clinical studies support the effectiveness of the da Vinci® System when used in minimally invasive surgery, individual results may vary. Surgery with the da Vinci Surgical System may not be appropriate for every individual. Always ask your doctor about all treatment options, as well as their risks and benefits.