• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

使用三个机械臂进行机器人辅助分期诊断子宫内膜癌:与单中心腹腔镜和开腹手术的比较。

Robot-assisted staging using three robotic arms for endometrial cancer: comparison to laparoscopy and laparotomy at a single institution.

机构信息

Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Women's Cancer Clinic, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.

出版信息

J Surg Oncol. 2010 Feb 1;101(2):116-21. doi: 10.1002/jso.21436.

DOI:10.1002/jso.21436
PMID:19902479
Abstract

PURPOSE

To demonstrate the feasibility of robot-assisted staging surgery using three arms in patients with endometrial cancer.

METHODS

One hundred nine patients with clinical stage I endometrial cancer who underwent staging surgery at Yonsei University Health System were enrolled from May 2006 to January 2009. Patient demographics and operative outcomes were prospectively collected.

RESULTS

Robotic surgery using three arms was performed in 28 patients, laparoscopy in 25, and laparotomy in 56. There were no differences among the three groups in terms of patient demographics. The number of harvested pelvic lymph nodes was lower in the laparoscopy group than in the laparotomy group (18.36 +/- 7.25 vs. 24.39 +/- 10.08, respectively, P = 0.025), but there was no difference between the robot and laparotomy groups. The number of resected para-aortic lymph nodes and operative time did not differ among the three groups. The average hospital stay was longer for the laparotomy group than the robot and laparoscopy groups (10.78 days vs. 7.92 days vs. 7.67 days, respectively, P < 0.001). Operative complications and transfusions developed more frequently in the laparotomy group than in the robot and laparoscopy groups (25.0% vs. 7.1% vs. 8.0%, respectively, P = 0.049; 42.9% vs. 14.3% vs. 16.0%, respectively, P = 0.006).

CONCLUSION

Robot-assisted surgery using three arms is a feasible method for surgical staging in patients with clinical stage I endometrial cancer.

摘要

目的

展示在临床Ⅰ期子宫内膜癌患者中使用三臂机器人辅助分期手术的可行性。

方法

2006 年 5 月至 2009 年 1 月,在延世大学健康系统入组了 109 例临床Ⅰ期子宫内膜癌患者,行分期手术。前瞻性收集患者的人口统计学和手术结果。

结果

28 例患者采用三臂机器人手术,25 例采用腹腔镜手术,56 例采用剖腹手术。三组患者的人口统计学特征无差异。腹腔镜组的盆腔淋巴结清扫数目低于剖腹组(18.36±7.25 对 24.39±10.08,P=0.025),但与机器人组无差异。三组的腹主动脉旁淋巴结切除数目和手术时间无差异。剖腹组的平均住院时间长于机器人组和腹腔镜组(10.78 天对 7.92 天对 7.67 天,P<0.001)。剖腹组的手术并发症和输血发生率高于机器人组和腹腔镜组(25.0%对 7.1%对 8.0%,P=0.049;42.9%对 14.3%对 16.0%,P=0.006)。

结论

在临床Ⅰ期子宫内膜癌患者中,使用三臂机器人辅助手术是一种可行的手术分期方法。

相似文献

1
Robot-assisted staging using three robotic arms for endometrial cancer: comparison to laparoscopy and laparotomy at a single institution.使用三个机械臂进行机器人辅助分期诊断子宫内膜癌:与单中心腹腔镜和开腹手术的比较。
J Surg Oncol. 2010 Feb 1;101(2):116-21. doi: 10.1002/jso.21436.
2
Comparison of outcomes and cost for endometrial cancer staging via traditional laparotomy, standard laparoscopy and robotic techniques.通过传统剖腹术、标准腹腔镜检查和机器人技术进行子宫内膜癌分期的结果与成本比较。
Gynecol Oncol. 2008 Dec;111(3):407-11. doi: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2008.08.022. Epub 2008 Oct 1.
3
Surgical management of early-stage endometrial cancer in the elderly: is laparoscopy feasible?老年早期子宫内膜癌的手术治疗:腹腔镜手术可行吗?
Gynecol Oncol. 2001 Dec;83(3):563-8. doi: 10.1006/gyno.2001.6463.
4
Minimally invasive comprehensive surgical staging for endometrial cancer: Robotics or laparoscopy?子宫内膜癌的微创综合手术分期:机器人手术还是腹腔镜手术?
Gynecol Oncol. 2009 Apr;113(1):36-41. doi: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2008.12.005. Epub 2009 Jan 24.
5
Laparoscopy compared with laparotomy for the surgical staging of endometrial carcinoma.腹腔镜检查与剖腹手术用于子宫内膜癌手术分期的比较。
J Obstet Gynaecol Res. 2005 Aug;31(4):286-90. doi: 10.1111/j.1447-0756.2005.00289.x.
6
Hysterectomy for obese women with endometrial cancer: laparoscopy or laparotomy?肥胖子宫内膜癌女性的子宫切除术:腹腔镜手术还是开腹手术?
Gynecol Oncol. 2000 Sep;78(3 Pt 1):329-35. doi: 10.1006/gyno.2000.5914.
7
A comparative study of 3 surgical methods for hysterectomy with staging for endometrial cancer: robotic assistance, laparoscopy, laparotomy.子宫内膜癌分期子宫切除术的三种手术方法比较研究:机器人辅助手术、腹腔镜手术、开腹手术。
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2008 Oct;199(4):360.e1-9. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2008.08.012.
8
Cost analysis of laparoscopy versus laparotomy for early endometrial cancer.早期子宫内膜癌腹腔镜手术与开腹手术的成本分析
Gynecol Oncol. 1999 Dec;75(3):460-3. doi: 10.1006/gyno.1999.5606.
9
Clinical outcome and complications of laparoscopic surgery compared with traditional surgery in women with endometrial cancer.子宫内膜癌女性患者腹腔镜手术与传统手术的临床结局及并发症比较
Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2004 Jul;270(1):25-30. doi: 10.1007/s00404-003-0488-7. Epub 2003 May 1.
10
A detailed analysis of the learning curve: robotic hysterectomy and pelvic-aortic lymphadenectomy for endometrial cancer.学习曲线的详细分析:子宫内膜癌的机器人子宫切除术和盆腔-主动脉淋巴结清扫术
Gynecol Oncol. 2009 Aug;114(2):162-7. doi: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2009.04.017. Epub 2009 May 9.

引用本文的文献

1
Bibliometric analysis of global research dynamics in robot-assisted hysterectomy over the past 20 years.过去20年机器人辅助子宫切除术全球研究动态的文献计量分析。
J Robot Surg. 2025 Sep 17;19(1):613. doi: 10.1007/s11701-025-02783-7.
2
Impact of obesity on the outcomes and cost of robotic surgery for Stage IA endometrial cancer: a regional perspective from Japan.肥胖对IA期子宫内膜癌机器人手术的疗效和成本的影响:来自日本的区域视角
Int J Clin Oncol. 2025 May 5. doi: 10.1007/s10147-025-02772-8.
3
Different surgical methods of hysterectomy for the management of endometrial cancer: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.
子宫内膜癌治疗中子宫切除术的不同手术方法:系统评价与网状Meta分析
Front Oncol. 2025 Jan 15;14:1524991. doi: 10.3389/fonc.2024.1524991. eCollection 2024.
4
Validate robot-assisted total laparoscopic hysterectomy with four equally-spaced ports without an assistant port.验证无辅助操作孔、四孔等距机器人辅助全腹腔镜子宫切除术。
J Robot Surg. 2024 Jan 27;18(1):55. doi: 10.1007/s11701-023-01800-x.
5
Surgical treatment of endometrioid endometrial carcinoma - laparotomy versus laparoscopy.子宫内膜样子宫内膜癌的手术治疗——开腹手术与腹腔镜手术对比
J Turk Ger Gynecol Assoc. 2022 Dec 8;23(4):233-240. doi: 10.4274/jtgga.galenos.2022.2021-12-2. Epub 2022 Oct 26.
6
Peri-operative and survival outcomes analysis of patients with endometrial cancer managed by three surgical approaches: a long-term Bulgarian experience.三种手术方式治疗子宫内膜癌患者的围手术期和生存结局分析:一项长期的保加利亚经验。
J Robot Surg. 2022 Dec;16(6):1367-1382. doi: 10.1007/s11701-022-01374-0. Epub 2022 Feb 10.
7
Comparative Survival Outcome of Robot-Assisted Staging Surgery Using Three Robotic Arms versus Open Surgery for Endometrial Cancer.机器人辅助分期手术与开腹手术治疗子宫内膜癌的生存结局比较。
Yonsei Med J. 2021 Jan;62(1):68-74. doi: 10.3349/ymj.2021.62.1.68.
8
A Meta-Analysis of Robotic Surgery in Endometrial Cancer: Comparison with Laparoscopy and Laparotomy.机器人手术在子宫内膜癌中的Meta 分析:与腹腔镜和开腹手术的比较。
Dis Markers. 2020 Jan 21;2020:2503753. doi: 10.1155/2020/2503753. eCollection 2020.
9
Robot-assisted surgery in gynaecology.妇科机器人辅助手术
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2019 Apr 15;4(4):CD011422. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD011422.pub2.
10
Nationwide Introduction of Minimally Invasive Robotic Surgery for Early-Stage Endometrial Cancer and Its Association With Severe Complications.全国范围内推广早期子宫内膜癌的微创机器人手术及其与严重并发症的关联。
JAMA Surg. 2019 Jun 1;154(6):530-538. doi: 10.1001/jamasurg.2018.5840.