GOAL

To determine the learning curve and surgical outcome for the first one hundred twenty-two robotic hysterectomy with lymphadenectomy patients in comparison to the first one hundred twenty-two patients who underwent the same procedure laparoscopically.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

An analysis of the first 122 patients who underwent a robotic assisted hysterectomy with lymphadenectomy (RHBPPALND) was compared to the first 122 patients who underwent a total laparoscopic hysterectomy with lymphadenectomy (LHBPPALND). The learning curve of the surgical procedure was determined by measuring operative time with respect to chronological order of each patient who had undergone their respective procedure. Number of lymph nodes, estimated blood loss, days of hospitalization, and complications of all patients were also analyzed and compared.

RESULTS

The learning curve of the surgical procedure was determined by measuring operative time with respect to chronological order of each patient who had undergone their respective procedure. Data were analyzed for mean age, body mass index, operative time, estimated blood loss, lymph node retrieval and complications for both surgical procedures. The mean operative time was 147.2±48.2 and 186.8±59.8 for RHBPPALND and LHBPPALND respectively. The mean EBL was statistically significant at 81.1±45.9 and 207.4±109.4 for RHBPPALND and LHBPPALND respectively. The total number of pelvic and aortic lymph nodes was 25.1±12.7 for RHBPPALND and 43.1±17.8 for LHBPPALND. The number of pelvic lymph node was 19.2±9.0 and 24.7±11.9 for RHBPPALND and LHBPPALND. The days of hospitalization of RHBPPALND and LHBPPALND were 1.5±0.9 and 3.2±2.3. The number of intraoperative complications for RHBPPALND, and LHBPPALND was 1 and 7, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Robotic hysterectomy with lymphadenectomy has a faster learning curve in comparison to laparoscopic hysterectomy with lymphadenectomy. The adequacy of surgical staging was comparable between the two surgical methods. RHBPPALND is associated with shorter hospitalization, less blood loss and less intraoperative and major complications, and lower rate of conversion to open procedure.