• 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

机器人辅助、腹腔镜或开腹子宫切除术:子宫内膜癌手术方式的手术结局。

Robotic, Laparoscopic, or Open Hysterectomy: Surgical Outcomes by Approach in Endometrial Cancer.

机构信息

Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Gynecologic Oncology Division, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington.

Department of Epidemiology, School of Public Health, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington; Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington.

出版信息

J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2018 Sep-Oct;25(6):986-993. doi: 10.1016/j.jmig.2018.01.010. Epub 2018 Jan 31.

DOI:10.1016/j.jmig.2018.01.010
PMID:29360514
Abstract

STUDY OBJECTIVES

To compare patient outcomes by surgical approach in the management of endometrial cancer (EC) in Washington State from 2008 to 2013.

DESIGN

Population-based retrospective cohort study (Canadian Task Force classification II-2).

SETTING

Washington State.

PATIENTS

EC patients treated with robotic-assisted surgery (RAS), laparoscopy (LS), or laparotomy (XLAP).

INTERVENTIONS

Comprehensive Hospital Abstract Reporting System to identify patients and assess the association of surgical approach with length of stay, readmissions, and perioperative complications.

MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS

We identified 3712 cases of EC managed with either RAS, LS, or XLAP. Mean length of stay was not clinically different for RAS (1.5 days) and LS (1.6 days) but was 2.31 days longer for XLAP compared with LS (p < .001). Odds of any readmission did not differ for either RAS or XLAP compared with LS; however, early readmissions were half as likely for RAS compared with LS (p = .014). Complications were more than 2.5 times as likely for XLAP versus LS (p < .001), whereas complications did not differ for RAS versus LS (p = .931).

CONCLUSIONS

RAS is as an alternative to LS in the treatment of EC and is preferable to XLAP. The use of RAS resulted in fewer early readmissions compared with LS and resulted in an increased proportion of cases via minimally invasive surgery.

摘要

研究目的

比较 2008 年至 2013 年华盛顿州子宫内膜癌(EC)患者的手术治疗效果。

设计

基于人群的回顾性队列研究(加拿大任务组分类 II-2)。

地点

华盛顿州。

患者

接受机器人辅助手术(RAS)、腹腔镜(LS)或剖腹手术(XLAP)治疗的 EC 患者。

干预措施

综合医院摘要报告系统用于识别患者,并评估手术方法与住院时间、再入院率和围手术期并发症之间的关联。

测量和结果

我们确定了 3712 例接受 RAS、LS 或 XLAP 治疗的 EC 患者。RAS(1.5 天)和 LS(1.6 天)的平均住院时间无明显差异,但与 LS 相比,XLAP 的住院时间长 2.31 天(p < .001)。与 LS 相比,RAS 或 XLAP 的任何再入院率无差异;然而,RAS 的早期再入院率比 LS 低一半(p = .014)。与 LS 相比,XLAP 的并发症发生率高出 2.5 倍以上(p < .001),而 RAS 与 LS 的并发症发生率无差异(p = .931)。

结论

RAS 是治疗 EC 的 LS 的替代方法,优于 XLAP。与 LS 相比,RAS 可减少早期再入院,且通过微创手术治疗的病例比例增加。

相似文献

1
Robotic, Laparoscopic, or Open Hysterectomy: Surgical Outcomes by Approach in Endometrial Cancer.机器人辅助、腹腔镜或开腹子宫切除术:子宫内膜癌手术方式的手术结局。
J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2018 Sep-Oct;25(6):986-993. doi: 10.1016/j.jmig.2018.01.010. Epub 2018 Jan 31.
2
The trend towards minimally invasive surgery (MIS) for endometrial cancer: an ACS-NSQIP evaluation of surgical outcomes.子宫内膜癌微创手术(MIS)的发展趋势:美国外科医师学会国家外科质量改进计划(ACS-NSQIP)对手术结果的评估
Gynecol Oncol. 2015 Mar;136(3):512-5. doi: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2014.11.014. Epub 2014 Nov 20.
3
Robotic versus laparoscopic versus open surgery in morbidly obese endometrial cancer patients - a comparative analysis of total charges and complication rates.肥胖子宫内膜癌患者的机器人手术、腹腔镜手术与开放手术——总费用和并发症发生率的比较分析
Gynecol Oncol. 2015 Nov;139(2):300-5. doi: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2015.09.006. Epub 2015 Sep 10.
4
Classification of Postoperative Complications in Robotic-assisted Compared With Laparoscopic Hysterectomy for Endometrial Cancer.机器人辅助与腹腔镜子宫内膜癌根治术术后并发症的分类
J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2016 Nov-Dec;23(7):1181-1188. doi: 10.1016/j.jmig.2016.08.832. Epub 2016 Sep 9.
5
Minimally invasive hysterectomy surgery rates for endometrial cancer performed at National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) Centers.在国家综合癌症网络(NCCN)中心进行的子宫内膜癌的微创子宫切除术手术率。
Gynecol Oncol. 2018 Mar;148(3):480-484. doi: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2018.01.002. Epub 2018 Jan 12.
6
Comparative safety and effectiveness of robot-assisted laparoscopic hysterectomy versus conventional laparoscopy and laparotomy for endometrial cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis.机器人辅助腹腔镜子宫切除术与传统腹腔镜手术及剖腹手术治疗子宫内膜癌的比较安全性和有效性:一项系统评价和荟萃分析。
Eur J Surg Oncol. 2016 Sep;42(9):1303-14. doi: 10.1016/j.ejso.2016.06.400. Epub 2016 Jun 29.
7
Clinical comparison of robotic, laparoscopic, and open hysterectomy procedures for endometrial cancer patients.子宫内膜癌患者机器人辅助、腹腔镜及开腹子宫切除术的临床比较
J Robot Surg. 2017 Sep;11(3):291-297. doi: 10.1007/s11701-016-0651-3. Epub 2016 Nov 3.
8
A prospective, comparative study on robotic versus open-surgery hysterectomy and pelvic lymphadenectomy for endometrial carcinoma.一项关于机器人辅助与开放手术子宫切除术及盆腔淋巴结清扫术治疗子宫内膜癌的前瞻性比较研究。
Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2015 Feb;25(2):250-6. doi: 10.1097/IGC.0000000000000357.
9
Same-day discharge is feasible and safe in patients undergoing minimally invasive staging for gynecologic malignancies.在接受妇科恶性肿瘤微创分期的患者中,当天出院是可行且安全的。
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2015 Feb;212(2):186.e1-8. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2014.08.010. Epub 2014 Aug 14.
10
Impact of age on surgical staging and approaches (laparotomy, laparoscopy and robotic surgery) in endometrial cancer management.年龄对子宫内膜癌治疗中手术分期及手术方式(剖腹手术、腹腔镜手术和机器人手术)的影响。
Eur J Surg Oncol. 2017 Apr;43(4):703-709. doi: 10.1016/j.ejso.2016.10.022. Epub 2016 Nov 27.

引用本文的文献

1
Microsurgical Robotic System for Myringoplasty: Feasibility Study.用于鼓膜成形术的显微外科机器人系统:可行性研究。
Laryngoscope Investig Otolaryngol. 2025 May 24;10(3):e70169. doi: 10.1002/lio2.70169. eCollection 2025 Jun.
2
Survival Impact of Robotic-Assisted Laparoscopy (RAL) vs. Conventional Laparoscopy (LPS) in the Treatment of Endometrial Cancer.机器人辅助腹腔镜手术(RAL)与传统腹腔镜手术(LPS)治疗子宫内膜癌的生存影响
Cancers (Basel). 2025 Jan 27;17(3):435. doi: 10.3390/cancers17030435.
3
The COMPARE Study: Comparing Perioperative Outcomes of Oncologic Minimally Invasive Laparoscopic, da Vinci Robotic, and Open Procedures: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of the Evidence.
COMPARE研究:比较肿瘤微创腹腔镜手术、达芬奇机器人手术和开放手术的围手术期结局:证据的系统评价和荟萃分析
Ann Surg. 2025 May 1;281(5):748-763. doi: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000006572. Epub 2024 Oct 22.
4
Robotic-assisted Versus Conventional Laparoscopic Hysterectomy for Benign Gynecological Conditions: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.机器人辅助与传统腹腔镜子宫切除术治疗良性妇科疾病:系统评价与荟萃分析
J Midlife Health. 2024 Apr-Jun;15(2):91-98. doi: 10.4103/jmh.jmh_235_23. Epub 2024 Jul 5.
5
Surgical Treatment for Endometrial Cancer, Hysterectomy Performed via Minimally Invasive Routes Compared with Open Surgery: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.子宫内膜癌的手术治疗:微创途径子宫切除术与开放手术的比较——系统评价与网状Meta分析
Cancers (Basel). 2024 May 13;16(10):1860. doi: 10.3390/cancers16101860.
6
Prognosis and Efficacy of Laparoscopic Surgery on Patients with Endometrial Carcinoma: Systematic Evaluation and Meta-Analysis.腹腔镜手术治疗子宫内膜癌患者的预后和疗效:系统评价和荟萃分析。
Comput Math Methods Med. 2022 Sep 22;2022:9384134. doi: 10.1155/2022/9384134. eCollection 2022.
7
Survival Analysis in Endometrial Carcinomas by Type of Surgical Approach: A Matched-Pair Study.子宫内膜癌手术方式类型的生存分析:一项配对研究。
Cancers (Basel). 2022 Feb 21;14(4):1081. doi: 10.3390/cancers14041081.
8
Surgical and Patient Outcomes of Robotic Versus Conventional Laparoscopic Hysterectomy: A Systematic Review.机器人辅助与传统腹腔镜子宫切除术的手术及患者预后:一项系统评价
Cureus. 2021 Aug 2;13(8):e16828. doi: 10.7759/cureus.16828. eCollection 2021 Aug.
9
ESGO/ESTRO/ESP Guidelines for the management of patients with endometrial carcinoma.欧洲妇科肿瘤学会/欧洲放射肿瘤学会/西班牙妇科肿瘤学会子宫内膜癌患者管理指南
Virchows Arch. 2021 Feb;478(2):153-190. doi: 10.1007/s00428-020-03007-z.
10
Expression of TRA2B in endometrial carcinoma and its regulatory roles in endometrial carcinoma cells.TRA2B在子宫内膜癌中的表达及其在子宫内膜癌细胞中的调控作用。
Oncol Lett. 2019 Sep;18(3):2455-2463. doi: 10.3892/ol.2019.10553. Epub 2019 Jul 3.