Survival outcomes of robotic-assisted laparoscopy versus conventional laparoscopy and laparotomy for endometrial cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

被引:20
作者
Fu, Hanlin [1 ]
Zhang, Jiahui [1 ]
Zhao, Shiyi [1 ]
He, Nannan [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] Zhengzhou Univ, Dept Gynecol, Affiliated Hosp 1, Zhengzhou, Peoples R China
[2] Zhengzhou Univ, Dept Gynecol, Affiliated Hosp 1, 1 Jianshe East Rd, Zhengzhou 450052, Henan Province, Peoples R China
关键词
Endometrial cancer; Robotic-assisted laparoscopy; Long-term survival; Conventional laparoscopy; Laparotomy; OPEN SURGERY; HYSTERECTOMY; WOMEN; CARCINOMA; OBESE; MANAGEMENT; COST;
D O I
10.1016/j.ygyno.2023.04.026
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
Objective. Robotic-assisted laparoscopy (RALS) has gained widespread acceptance in the field of gynecologi-cal oncology. However, whether the prognosis of endometrial cancer after RALS is superior to conventional lap-aroscopy (CLS) and laparotomy (LT) remains inconclusive. Therefore, the aim of this meta-analysis was to compare the long-term survival outcomes of RALS with CLS and LT for endometrial cancer.Methods. A systematic literature search was conducted on electronic databases (PubMed, Cochrane, EMBASE and Web of Science) until May 24, 2022, followed by a manual search. Based on inclusion and exclusion criteria, publications investigating long-term survival outcomes after RALS vs CLS or LT in endometrial cancer patients were collected. The primary outcomes included overall survival (OS), disease-specific survival (DSS), recurrence-free survival (RFS) and disease-free survival (DFS). Fixed effects models or random effects models were employed to calculate the pooled hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) as appropriate. Heterogeneity and publication bias were also assessed.Results. RALS and CLS had no difference in OS (HR = 0.962, 95% CI: 0.922-1.004), RFS (HR = 1.096, 95% CI: 0.947-1.296), and DSS (HR = 1.489, 95% CI: 0.713-3.107) for endometrial cancer; however, RALS was signifi-cantly associated with favorable OS (HR = 0.682, 95% CI: 0.576-0.807), RFS (HR = 0.793, 95% CI: 0.653-0.964), and DSS (HR = 0.441, 95% CI: 0.298-0.652) when compared with LT. In the subgroup analysis of effect measures and follow-up length, RALS showed comparable or superior RFS/OS to CLS and LT. In early-stage endometrial cancer patients, RALS had similar OS but worse RFS than CLS.Conclusions. RALS is safe in the management of endometrial cancer, with long-term oncological outcomes equivalent to CLS and superior to LT.(c) 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http:// creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
引用
收藏
页码:55 / 67
页数:13
相关论文
共 50 条
[1]   Robot-assisted versus laparoscopic minimally invasive surgery for the treatment of stage I endometrial cancer [J].
Argenta, Peter A. ;
Mattson, Jordan ;
Rivard, Colleen L. ;
Luther, Elizabeth ;
Schefter, Alexandra ;
Vogel, Rachel, I .
GYNECOLOGIC ONCOLOGY, 2022, 165 (02) :347-352
[2]   Determinants of Surgical Approach and Survival Among Women with Endometrial Carcinoma [J].
Bixel, Kristin ;
Barrington, David A. ;
Vetter, Monica H. ;
Suarez, Adrian A. ;
Felix, Ashley S. .
JOURNAL OF MINIMALLY INVASIVE GYNECOLOGY, 2022, 29 (02) :219-230
[3]   A population-based registry study evaluating surgery in newly diagnosed uterine cancer [J].
Borgfeldt, Christer ;
Kalapotharakos, Grigorios ;
Asciutto, Katrin C. ;
Lofgren, Mats ;
Hogberg, Thomas .
ACTA OBSTETRICIA ET GYNECOLOGICA SCANDINAVICA, 2016, 95 (08) :901-911
[4]   Implementing robotic surgery for uterine cancer in the United States: Better outcomes without increased costs [J].
Casarin, Jvan ;
Song, Chao ;
Multinu, Francesco ;
Cappuccio, Serena ;
Liu, Emelline ;
Butler, Kristina A. ;
Glaser, Gretchen E. ;
Cliby, William A. ;
Langstraat, Carrie L. ;
Ghezzi, Fabio ;
Fu, Alex Z. ;
Mariani, Andrea .
GYNECOLOGIC ONCOLOGY, 2020, 156 (02) :451-458
[5]   Self-efficacy, cancer-related fatigue, and quality of life in patients with resected lung cancer [J].
Chen, Hong-Lin ;
Liu, Kun ;
You, Qing-Sheng .
EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF CANCER CARE, 2018, 27 (06)
[6]   Comparing robotic surgery with laparoscopy and laparotomy for endometrial cancer management: A cohort study [J].
Chiou, Hung-Yi ;
Chiu, Li-Hsuan ;
Chen, Ching-Hui ;
Yen, Yuan-Kuei ;
Chang, Ching-Wen ;
Liu, Wei-Min .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 2015, 13 :17-22
[7]   Comparison of perioperative outcomes and cost of robotic-assisted laparoscopy, laparoscopy and laparotomy for endometrial cancer [J].
Coronado, Pluvio J. ;
Herraiz, Miguel A. ;
Magrina, Javier F. ;
Fasero, Maria ;
Vidart, Jose A. .
EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY AND REPRODUCTIVE BIOLOGY, 2012, 165 (02) :289-294
[8]   Endometrial cancer [J].
Crosbie, Emma J. ;
Kitson, Sarah J. ;
McAlpine, Jessica N. ;
Mukhopadhyay, Asima ;
Powell, Melanie E. ;
Singh, Naveena .
LANCET, 2022, 399 (10333) :1412-1428
[9]   Robotic-Assisted Hysterectomy for Endometrial Cancer Compared With Traditional Laparoscopic and Laparotomy Approaches A Systematic Review [J].
Gaia, Giorgia ;
Holloway, Robert W. ;
Santoro, Luigi ;
Ahmad, Sarfraz ;
Di Silverio, Elena ;
Spinillo, Arsenio .
OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY, 2010, 116 (06) :1422-1431
[10]   Laparoscopy versus laparotomy for the management of early stage endometrial cancer [J].
Galaal, Khadra ;
Donkers, Hannah ;
Bryant, Andrew ;
Lopes, Alberto D. .
COCHRANE DATABASE OF SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS, 2018, (10)