TY - JOUR
T1 - Comparison of robotic-assisted vs conventional laparoscopy for extraperitoneal paraaortic lymphadenectomy
AU - Díaz-Feijoo, B.
AU - Gil-Ibáñez, B.
AU - Pérez-Benavente, A.
AU - Martínez-Gómez, X.
AU - Colás, E.
AU - Sánchez-Iglesias, J. L.
AU - Cabrera-Díaz, S.
AU - Puig-Puig, O.
AU - Magrina, J. F.
AU - Gil-Moreno, A.
PY - 2014/1/1
Y1 - 2014/1/1
N2 - Objective To evaluate the perioperative outcomes of robotic-assisted extraperitoneal paraaortic lymphadenectomy for locally advanced cervical cancer and to compare to a previous series of patients from our institution undergoing the same procedure by conventional laparoscopy. Methods 17 patients with locally advanced cervical cancer (FIGO stages IB2, IIA2 and IIB-IVA) underwent pretherapeutic extraperitoneal paraaortic lymphadenectomy by robotic-assisted laparoscopy. Perioperative outcomes including age, BMI, FIGO stage, operating time, blood loss, complications and length of hospital stay were compared to a series of 83 patients from our institution undergoing the same procedure by conventional laparoscopy. Results The median values for operating time and hospital days for the robotic-assisted and conventional laparoscopy groups were 150 vs. 150 min and 2 vs 2 days, respectively. In the robotic group, blood loss was lower (90 vs 20 ml, p < 0.05) and more aortic nodes were removed (14 vs 17 nodes, p < 0.05). Docking time was 7 min (range 3-15). There were no intraoperative complications. There were no differences for postoperative complications (17.6% vs 8.4%). Conclusion Robotic-assisted and conventional laparoscopy provide similar perioperative outcomes other than lower blood loss and higher number of aortic nodes removed (both without clinical impact) in robotic patients for the performance of extraperitoneal paraaortic lymphadenectomy in patients with locally advanced cervical cancer. We believe that robotic surgery is an additional tool to perform the same surgical procedure. Highlights Robotic-assisted and conventional laparoscopic extraperitoneal paraaortic lymphadenectomy provide similar perioperative outcomes. © 2013 Elsevier Inc.
AB - Objective To evaluate the perioperative outcomes of robotic-assisted extraperitoneal paraaortic lymphadenectomy for locally advanced cervical cancer and to compare to a previous series of patients from our institution undergoing the same procedure by conventional laparoscopy. Methods 17 patients with locally advanced cervical cancer (FIGO stages IB2, IIA2 and IIB-IVA) underwent pretherapeutic extraperitoneal paraaortic lymphadenectomy by robotic-assisted laparoscopy. Perioperative outcomes including age, BMI, FIGO stage, operating time, blood loss, complications and length of hospital stay were compared to a series of 83 patients from our institution undergoing the same procedure by conventional laparoscopy. Results The median values for operating time and hospital days for the robotic-assisted and conventional laparoscopy groups were 150 vs. 150 min and 2 vs 2 days, respectively. In the robotic group, blood loss was lower (90 vs 20 ml, p < 0.05) and more aortic nodes were removed (14 vs 17 nodes, p < 0.05). Docking time was 7 min (range 3-15). There were no intraoperative complications. There were no differences for postoperative complications (17.6% vs 8.4%). Conclusion Robotic-assisted and conventional laparoscopy provide similar perioperative outcomes other than lower blood loss and higher number of aortic nodes removed (both without clinical impact) in robotic patients for the performance of extraperitoneal paraaortic lymphadenectomy in patients with locally advanced cervical cancer. We believe that robotic surgery is an additional tool to perform the same surgical procedure. Highlights Robotic-assisted and conventional laparoscopic extraperitoneal paraaortic lymphadenectomy provide similar perioperative outcomes. © 2013 Elsevier Inc.
KW - Cervical cancer
KW - Extraperitoneal paraaortic lymphadenectomy
KW - Robotic-assisted laparoscopy
U2 - 10.1016/j.ygyno.2013.11.004
DO - 10.1016/j.ygyno.2013.11.004
M3 - Article
SN - 0090-8258
VL - 132
SP - 98
EP - 101
JO - Gynecologic Oncology
JF - Gynecologic Oncology
IS - 1
ER -
