Surgical outcomes of robotic-assisted surgical staging for endometrial cancer are equivalent to traditional laparoscopic staging at a minimally invasive surgical center.

OBJECTIVE

To compare peri- and post-operative complications and outcomes of robotic-assisted surgical staging with traditional laparoscopic surgical staging for women with endometrial cancer.

METHODS

A retrospective chart review of cases of women undergoing minimally invasive total hysterectomy and pelvic and para-aortic lymphadenectomy by a robotic-assisted approach or traditional laparoscopic approach was conducted. Major intraoperative complications, including vascular injury, enterotomy, cystotomy, or conversion to laparotomy, were measured. Secondary outcomes including operative time, blood loss, transfusion rate, number of lymph nodes retrieved, and the length of hospitalization were also measured.

RESULTS

275 cases were identified-102 patients with robotic-assisted staging and 173 patients with traditional laparoscopic staging. There was no significant difference in the rate of major complications between groups (p=0.13). The mean operative time was longer in cases of robotic-assisted staging (237 min vs. 178 min, p<0.0001); however, blood loss was significantly lower (109 ml vs. 187 ml, p<0.0001). The mean number of lymph nodes retrieved were similar between groups (p=0.32). There were no significant differences in the time to discharge, re-admission, or re-operation rates between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

Robotic-assisted surgery is an acceptable alternative to laparoscopy for minimally invasive staging of endometrial cancer. In addition to the improved ease of operation, visualization, and range of motion of the robotic instruments, robotic surgery results in a lower mean blood loss, although longer operative time. More data are needed to determine if the rates of urinary tract injuries and other surgical complications can be reduced with the use of robotic surgery.