Robotic or laparoscopic pelvic exenteration for gynecological malignancies: feasible options to open surgery

被引:2
|
作者
Dudus, Laura [1 ]
Minciuna, Corina [1 ]
Tudor, Stefan [1 ]
Lacatus, Monica [1 ]
Stefan, Bogdan
Vasilescu, Catalin [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] Fundeni Clin Inst, Dept Gen Surg, 258 Fundeni St, Bucharest 022328, Romania
[2] Carol Davila Univ Med & Pharm, Bucharest, Romania
关键词
Minimally Invasive Surgery; Pelvic Exenteration; Gynecologic Neoplasm; Cervical Cancer; CERVICAL-CANCER; RADICAL HYSTERECTOMY; LYMPHADENECTOMY; ENDOMETRIAL; EXPERIENCE; MANAGEMENT;
D O I
10.3802/jgo.2024.35.e12
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
Objective: To acknowledge that minimally invasive pelvic exenteration is a feasible alternative to open surgery and potentially identify prediction factors for patient outcome. Methods: The study was designed as a retrospective single team analysis of 12 consecutive cases, set between January 2008 and January 2022. Results: Six anterior and 6 total pelvic exenterations were performed. A 75% of cases were treated using a robotic approach. In 4 cases, an ileal conduit was used for urinary reconstruction. Mean operative time was 360 +/- 30.7 minutes. for anterior pelvic exenterations and 440 +/- 40.7 minutes. for total pelvic exenterations and mean blood loss was 350 +/- 35 mL. An R0 resection was performed in 9 cases (75%) and peri-operative morbidity was 16.6%, with no deaths recorded. Median disease-free survival was 12 months (10-14) and overall survival (OS) was 20 months (1-127). In terms of OS, 50% of patients were still alive 24 months after surgery. Taking into consideration the follow up period,16.6% of females under 50 or above 70 years old did not reach the cut off and 4 out of 6 patients that failed to reach it were diagnosed with distant metastases or local recurrence (p=0.169). Conclusion: Our experience is very much consistent with literature in regard to primary site of cancer, post-operative complications, R0 resection and survival rates. On the other hand, minimally invasive approach and urinary reconstruction type were in contrast with cited publications. Minimally invasive pelvic exenteration is indeed a safe and feasible procedure, providing patients selection is appropriately performed.
引用
收藏
页数:10
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Clinical effectiveness of robotic versus laparoscopic and open surgery: an overview of systematic reviews
    Lai, Tzu-Jung
    Roxburgh, Campbell
    Boyd, Kathleen Anne
    Bouttell, Janet
    BMJ OPEN, 2024, 14 (09):
  • [32] Level 1 Evidence for Robotic Surgery for Urological and Gynecological Pelvic Cancers: Where do We Currently Stand?
    Sighinolfi, Maria Chiara
    Gaia, Giorgia
    Afonina, Margarita
    Assumma, Simone
    Calcagnile, Tommaso
    Garelli, Giulia
    Sangalli, Mattia
    Guarnerio, Paolo Pasquale
    Felline, Mauro
    Eissa, Ahmed
    Sarchi, Luca
    Terzoni, Stefano
    Micali, Salvatore
    Marconi, Annamaria
    Rocco, Bernardo
    CLINICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY, 2023, 50 (02)
  • [33] Robotic-assisted laparoscopic anterior pelvic exenteration in patients with advanced ovarian cancer: Farghaly's technique
    Farghaly, S. A.
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF GYNAECOLOGICAL ONCOLOGY, 2010, 31 (04) : 361 - 363
  • [34] Rate of Port-Site Metastasis Is Uncommon in Patients Undergoing Robotic Surgery for Gynecological Malignancies
    Ndofor, Bih T.
    Soliman, Pamela T.
    Schmeler, Kathleen M.
    Nick, Alpa M.
    Frumovitz, Michael
    Ramirez, Pedro T.
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF GYNECOLOGICAL CANCER, 2011, 21 (05) : 936 - 940
  • [35] Robot-Assisted versus Laparoscopic Surgery for Pelvic Lymph Node Dissection in Patients with Gynecologic Malignancies
    Aiko, Kiyoshi
    Kanno, Kiyoshi
    Yanai, Shiori
    Sawada, Mari
    Sakate, Shintaro
    Andou, Masaaki
    GYNECOLOGY AND MINIMALLY INVASIVE THERAPY-GMIT, 2024, 13 (01): : 37 - 42
  • [36] Comparing minimally invasive surgical and open approaches to pelvic exenteration for locally advanced or recurrent pelvic malignancies - Systematic review and meta-analysis
    Ryan, Odhran K.
    Doogan, Katie L.
    Ryan, Eanna J.
    Donnelly, Mark
    Reynolds, Ian S.
    Creavin, Ben
    Davey, Matthew G.
    Kelly, Michael E.
    Kennelly, Rory
    Hanly, Ann
    Martin, Sean T.
    Winter, Des C.
    EJSO, 2023, 49 (08): : 1362 - 1373
  • [37] Application of robotic surgery and traditional laparoscopic surgery in lymph node dissection for gynecological cancer: A meta-analysis
    Lu, Yuanyuan
    Chen, Jingping
    Wei, Renji
    Lin, Wenting
    Chen, Yudong
    Su, Yicheng
    Liu, Lijuan
    Liang, Yukun
    Wei, Mulan
    ONCOLOGY LETTERS, 2023, 25 (05)
  • [38] Robotic versus open and laparoscopic pelvic exenterations for pelvic cancer: a multicenter propensity-matched analysis in Japan
    Yatabe, Yusuke
    Hanaoka, Marie
    Hanazawa, Ryoichi
    Hirakawa, Akihiro
    Mukai, Toshiki
    Kimura, Kei
    Yamanoi, Koji
    Kono, Jin
    Yokota, Mitsuru
    Takahashi, Hiroki
    Kobayashi, Akihiro
    Kobayashi, Kenji
    Ichikawa, Nobuki
    Yasui, Masayoshi
    Nakane, Keita
    Yamamoto, Manabu
    Takenaka, Atsushi
    Nakamura, Yuya
    Takemasa, Ichiro
    Yabusaki, Norimitsu
    Akamoto, Shintaro
    Tatarano, Shuichi
    Murata, Kohei
    Manabe, Tatsuya
    Fujimura, Tetsuya
    Kawamura, Mikio
    Egi, Hiroyuki
    Yamaguchi, Shigeki
    Terai, Yoshito
    Inoue, Shigetaka
    Ito, Akihiro
    Kinugasa, Yusuke
    SURGICAL ENDOSCOPY AND OTHER INTERVENTIONAL TECHNIQUES, 2024, 38 (08): : 4390 - 4401
  • [39] The Trajectory of Revisional Bariatric Surgery: Open to Laparoscopic to Robotic
    Jawhar, Noura
    Sample, Jack W.
    Salame, Marita
    Marrero, Katie
    Tomey, Daniel
    Puvvadi, Suraj
    Ghanem, Omar M.
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL MEDICINE, 2024, 13 (07)
  • [40] The transferability of laparoscopic and open surgical skills to robotic surgery
    Maria Ordell Sundelin
    Charlotte Paltved
    Pernille Skjold Kingo
    Henrik Kjölhede
    Jørgen Bjerggaard Jensen
    Advances in Simulation, 7