Robotic approach for ovarian cancer: Perioperative and survival results and comparison with laparoscopy and laparotomy

被引:92
作者
Magrina, Javier F. [1 ,2 ]
Zanagnolo, Vanna [3 ]
Noble, Brie N. [1 ,2 ]
Kho, Rosanne M. [1 ,2 ]
Magtibay, Paul [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] Mayo Clin Arizona, Dept Gynecol, Phoenix, AZ 85054 USA
[2] Mayo Clin Arizona, Dept Biomed Stat & Informat, Phoenix, AZ 85054 USA
[3] European Inst Oncol, Milan, Italy
关键词
Ovarian cancer; Robotics; Laparoscopy; Cytoreduction; ENDOMETRIAL CANCER; ABDOMINAL HYSTERECTOMY; RADICAL HYSTERECTOMY; OUTCOMES; LYMPHADENECTOMY;
D O I
10.1016/j.ygyno.2010.11.045
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
Objective. Comparison of perioperative outcomes and survival of patients undergoing primary surgical treatment for epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) by a robotic, laparoscopy, or laparotomy approach. Methods. Retrospective case-control analysis of 25 patients with EOC undergoing robotic surgical treatment between March 2004 and December 2008. Comparison was made with similar patients treated by laparoscopy and laparotomy and matched by age, body mass index (BMI), and type of procedures between January 1999 and December 2006. Results. The mean operating times were 314.8, 253.8 and 260.7 min for robotic, laparoscopy and laparotomy patients, respectively (p < 0.05); the mean blood loss was 164.0, 266.7, and 1307.0 ml, respectively (p = 0.001); the mean length of hospital stay was 4.2, 3.2, and 9.4 days, respectively (p = 0.001). The overall survival (OS) for robotics, laparoscopy and laparotomy patients was 67.1%, 75.6% and 66.0%, respectively (p = 0.08). Patients were subdivided and compared according to the extent of surgery by the type and number of major procedures. Type I and II debulking patients operated by robotics and laparoscopy had improved perioperative outcomes as compared to laparotomy. For patients undergoing a type III debulking, robotic outcomes were not improved over laparotomy. Conclusion. Laparoscopy and robotics are preferable to laparotomy for patients with ovarian cancer requiring primary tumor excision alone or with one additional major procedure. Laparotomy is preferable for patients requiring two or more additional major procedures. Survival is not affected by the type of surgical approach. (C) 2010 Published by Elsevier Inc.
引用
收藏
页码:100 / 105
页数:6
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] RETRACTED: A Meta-Analysis of Robotic Surgery in Endometrial Cancer: Comparison with Laparoscopy and Laparotomy (Retracted Article)
    Wang, Jia
    Li, Xiaomao
    Wu, Haotian
    Zhang, Yu
    Wang, Fei
    [J]. DISEASE MARKERS, 2020, 2020
  • [32] Learning Curve and Surgical Outcome for Robotic-Assisted Hysterectomy with Lymphadenectomy: Case-Matched Controlled Comparison with Laparoscopy and Laparotomy for Treatment of Endometrial Cancer
    Lim, Peter C.
    Kang, Elizabeth
    Park, Do Hwan
    [J]. JOURNAL OF MINIMALLY INVASIVE GYNECOLOGY, 2010, 17 (06) : 739 - 748
  • [33] Comparing Robotic Surgery With Conventional Laparoscopy and Laparotomy for Cervical Cancer Management
    Chen, Ching-Hui
    Chiu, Li-Hsuan
    Chang, Ching-Wen
    Yen, Yuan-Kuei
    Huang, Yan-Hua
    Liu, Wei-Min
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF GYNECOLOGICAL CANCER, 2014, 24 (06) : 1105 - 1111
  • [34] Comparison of laparoscopy versus laparotomy for the surgical treatment of ovarian dermoid cysts
    Benezra, Victor
    Verma, Usha
    Whitted, R. Wayne
    [J]. GYNECOLOGICAL SURGERY, 2005, 2 (02) : 89 - 92
  • [35] Comparison of Perioperative Outcomes and Complication Rates Between Conventional Versus Robotic- Assisted Laparoscopy in the Evaluation and Management of Early, Advanced, and Recurrent Stage Ovarian, Fallopian Tube, and Primary Peritoneal Cancer
    Nezhat, Farr Reza
    Finger, Tamara Natasha
    Vetere, Patrick
    Radjabi, Amir Reza
    Vega, Mario
    Averbuch, Lauren
    Khalil, Susan
    Altinbas, Sadiman Kiykac
    Lax, Daniel
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF GYNECOLOGICAL CANCER, 2014, 24 (03) : 600 - 607
  • [36] Impact of age on surgical staging and approaches (laparotomy, laparoscopy and robotic surgery) in endometrial cancer management
    Bourgin, C.
    Lambaudie, E.
    Houvenaeghel, G.
    Foucher, F.
    Leveque, J.
    Lavoue, V.
    [J]. EJSO, 2017, 43 (04): : 703 - 709
  • [37] Robotic Surgery Versus Laparotomy in Elderly Patients with Endometrial Cancer: Perioperative Outcomes and Complications
    Salman, Lina
    Guy, Liora
    Borovich, Adi
    Raban, Oded
    Sabah, Gad
    Yeoshoua, Effi
    Jakobson-Setton, Ariella
    Eitan, Ram
    [J]. JOURNAL OF GYNECOLOGIC SURGERY, 2020, 36 (05) : 272 - 276
  • [38] Laparoscopy or laparotomy? A comparison of 240 patients with early-stage endometrial cancer
    Santi, Alessandro
    Kuhn, Annette
    Gyr, Thomas
    Eberhard, Markus
    Johann, Silke
    Guenthert, Andreas R.
    Mueller, Michael D.
    [J]. SURGICAL ENDOSCOPY AND OTHER INTERVENTIONAL TECHNIQUES, 2010, 24 (04): : 939 - 943
  • [39] Aortic surgery completely by laparoscopy or by laparotomy: comparison of the results after matching by a propensity score
    Ricco, Jean-Baptiste
    Cau, Jerome
    Schneider, Fabrice
    Desvergnes, Mathieu
    Lefort, Nicolas
    Belmonte, Romain
    [J]. BULLETIN DE L ACADEMIE NATIONALE DE MEDECINE, 2016, 200 (03): : 527 - 543
  • [40] A comparative study of 3 surgical methods for hysterectomy with staging for endometrial cancer: robotic assistance, laparoscopy, laparotomy
    Boggess, John F.
    Gehrig, Paola A.
    Cantrell, Leigh
    Shafer, Aaron
    Ridgway, Mildred
    Skinner, Elizabeth N.
    Fowler, Wesley C.
    [J]. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY, 2008, 199 (04) : 360.e1 - 360.e9