Robotic surgery in gynecology: an updated systematic review

Lori Weinberg, Sanjay Rao, Pedro F Escobar, Lori Weinberg, Sanjay Rao, Pedro F Escobar

Abstract

The introduction of da Vinci Robotic Surgery to the field of Gynecology has resulted in large changes in surgical management. The robotic platform allows less experienced laparoscopic surgeons to perform more complex procedures. In general gynecology and reproductive gynecology, the robot is being increasingly used for procedures such as hysterectomies, myomectomies, adnexal surgery, and tubal anastomosis. Among urogynecology the robot is being utilized for sacrocolopexies. In the field of gynecologic oncology, the robot is being increasingly used for hysterectomies and lymphadenectomies in oncologic diseases. Despite the rapid and widespread adoption of robotic surgery in gynecology, there are no randomized trials comparing its efficacy and safety to other traditional surgical approaches. Our aim is to update previously published reviews with a focus on only comparative observational studies. We determined that, with the right amount of training and skill, along with appropriate patient selection, robotic surgery can be highly advantageous. Patients will likely have less blood loss, less post-operative pain, faster recoveries, and fewer complications compared to open surgery and potentially even laparoscopy. However, until larger, well-designed observational studies or randomized control trials are completed which report long-term outcomes, we cannot definitively state the superiority of robotic surgery over other surgical methods.

References

    1. Tu FF, Beaumont JL, Senapati S, Gordon TEJ. Route of hysterectomy influence and teaching hospital status. Obstetrics and Gynecology. 2009;114(1):73–78.
    1. Paraiso MF, Walters MD, Rackley RR, Melek S, Hugney C. Laparoscopic and abdominal sacral colpopexies: a comparative cohort study. The American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology. 2005;192(5):1752–1758.
    1. Mais V, Ajossa S, Guerriero S, Mascia M, Solla E, Melis GB. Laparoscopic versus abdominal myomectomy: a prospective, randomized trial to evaluate benefits in early outcome. The American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology. 1996;174(2):654–658.
    1. Marescaux J, Rubino F. The ZEUS robotic system: experimental and clinical applications. Surgical Clinics of North America. 2003;83(6):1305–1315.
    1. Peplinski R. 2nd UK Robotic Urology Course. London, UK: Guy’s Hospital; 2006. Past, present and future of the Da Vinci robot.
    1. Matthews CA, Reid N, Ramakrishnan V, Hull K, Cohen S. Evaluation of the introduction of robotic technology on route of hysterectomy and complications in the first year of use. The American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology. 2010;203(5):499 e1–499 e5.
    1. Paley PJ, Veljovich DS, Shah CA, et al. Surgical outcomes in gynecologic oncology in the era of robotics: analysis of first 1000 cases. The American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology. 2011;204(6):551.e1–551.e9.
    1. Cho JE, Shamshirsaz AHA, Nezhat C, Nezhat C, Nezhat F. New technologies for reproductive medicine: laparoscopy, endoscopy, robotic surgery and gynecology. A review of the literature. Minerva Ginecologica. 2010;62(2):137–167.
    1. Holloway RW, Patel SD, Ahmad S. Robotic surgery in gynecology. Scandinavian Journal of Surgery. 2009;98(2):96–109.
    1. Matthews CA. Applications of robotic surgery in gynecology. Journal of Women’s Health. 2010;19(5):863–867.
    1. Tinelli A, Malvasi A, Gustapane S. Robotic assisted surgery in gynecology: current insights and future perspectives. Recent Patents on Biotechnology. 2011
    1. Frick AC, Falcone T. Robotics in gynecologic surgery. Minerva Ginecologica. 2009;61(3):187–199.
    1. Chen CCG, Falcone T. Robotic gynecologic surgery: past, present, and future. Clinical Obstetrics and Gynecology. 2009;52(3):335–343.
    1. Maeso S, Reza M, Mayol JA, et al. Efficacy of the Da Vinci surgical system in abdominal surgery compared with that of laparoscopy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Annals of Surgery. 2010;252(2):254–262.
    1. Reza M, Maeso S, Blasco JA, Andradas E. Meta-analysis of observational studies on the safety and effectiveness of robotic gynaecological surgery. The British Journal of Surgery. 2010;97(12):1772–1783.
    1. Egger M, Smith GD, O’Rourke K. Systematic Reviews in Health Care: Meta-analysis in Context. 2nd edition. London, UK: BMJ Publishing Group, BMA House; 2001.
    1. Stroup DF, Berlin JA, Morton SC, et al. Meta-analysis of observational studies in epidemiology: a proposal for reporting. Meta-analysis Of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) group. Journal of the American Medical Association. 2000;283(15):2008–2012.
    1. Nezhat C, Lavie O, Hsu S, Watson J, Barnett O, Lemyre M. Robotic-assisted laparoscopic myomectomy compared with standard laparoscopic myomectomy-a retrospective matched control study. Fertility and Sterility. 2009;91(2):556–559.
    1. Partin AW, Adams JB, Moore RG, Kavoussi LR. Complete robot-assisted laparoscopic urologic surgery: a preliminary report. Journal of the American College of Surgeons. 1995;181(6):552–557.
    1. Kappert U, Schneider J, Cichon R, et al. Development of robotic enhanced endoscopic surgery for the treatment of coronary artery disease. Circulation. 2001;104(12, supplement 1):i102–i107.
    1. Falcone T, Goldberg J, Garcia-Ruiz A, Margossian H, Stevens L. Full robotic assistance for laparoscopic tubal anastomosis: a case report. Journal of Laparoendoscopic and Advanced Surgical Techniques—Part A. 1999;9(1):107–113.
    1. Goldberg JM, Falcone T. Laparoscopic microsurgical tubal anastomosis with and without robotic assistance. Human Reproduction. 2003;18(1):145–147.
    1. Dharia Patel SP, Steinkampf MP, Whitten SJ, Malizia BA. Robotic tubal anastomosis: surgical technique and cost effectiveness. Fertility and Sterility. 2008;90(4):1175–1179.
    1. Magrina JF, Espada M, Munoz R, Noble BN, Kho RMC. Robotic adnexectomy compared with laparoscopy for adnexal mass. Obstetrics and Gynecology. 2009;114(3):581–584.
    1. Advincula AP, Xu X, Goudeau S, Ransom SB. Robot-assisted laparoscopic myomectomy versus abdominal myomectomy: a comparison of short-term surgical outcomes and immediate costs. Journal of Minimally Invasive Gynecology. 2007;14(6):698–705.
    1. Bedient CE, Magrina JF, Noble BN, Kho RM. Comparison of robotic and laparoscopic myomectomy. The American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology. 2009;201(6):566 e1–566 e5.
    1. Ascher-Walsh CJ, Capes TL. Robot-assisted laparoscopic myomectomy is an improvement over laparotomy in women with a limited number of myomas. Journal of Minimally Invasive Gynecology. 2010;17(3):306–310.
    1. Barakat EE, Bedaiwy MA, Zimberg S, et al. Robotic-assisted, laparoscopic, and abdominal myomectomy: a comparison of surgical outcomes. Obstetrics & Gynecology. 2011;117:256–265.
    1. Payne TN, Dauterive FR. A comparison of total laparoscopic hysterectomy to robotically assisted hysterectomy: surgical outcomes in a community practice. Journal of Minimally Invasive Gynecology. 2008;15(3):286–291.
    1. Shashoua AR, Gill D, Locher SR. Robotic-assisted total laparoscopic hysterectomy versus conventional total laparoscopic hysterectomy. Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons. 2009;13(3):364–369.
    1. Sarlos D, Kots L, Stevanovic N, Schaer G. Robotic hysterectomy versus conventional laparoscopic hysterectomy: outcome and cost analyses of a matched case-control study. European Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Reproductive Biology. 2010;150(1):92–96.
    1. Giep BN, Giep HN, Hubert HB. Comparison of minimally invasive surgical approaches for hysterectomy at a community hospital: robotic-assisted laparoscopic hysterectomy, laparoscopic-assisted vaginal hysterectomy and laparoscopic supracervical hysterectomy. Journal of Robotic Surgery. 2010;4(3):167–175.
    1. Geller EJ, Siddiqui NY, Wu JM, Visco AG. Short-term outcomes of robotic sacrocolpopexy compared with abdominal sacrocolpopexy. Obstetrics and Gynecology. 2008;112(6):1201–1206.
    1. Semm K. New methods of pelviscopy (gynecologic laparoscopy) for myomectomy, ovariectomy, tubectomy and adnectomy. Endoscopy. 1979;11(2):85–93.
    1. Nezhat C, Lavie O, Lemyre M, Unal E, Nezhat CH, Nezhat F. Robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery in gynecology: scientific dream or reality? Fertility and Sterility. 2009;91(6):2620–2622.
    1. Nezhat C, Saberi NS, Shahmohamady B, Nezhat F. Robotic-assisted laparoscopy in gynecological surgery. Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons. 2006;10(3):317–320.
    1. Liu C, Peresic D, Samadi D, Nezhat F. Robotic-assisted laparoscopic partial bladder resection for the treatment of infiltrating endometriosis. Journal of Minimally Invasive Gynecology. 2008;15(6):745–748.
    1. Chammas MF, Jr, Kim FJ, Barbarino A, et al. Asymptomatic rectal and bladder endometriosis: a case for robotic-assisted surgery. The Canadian Journal of Urology. 2008;15(3):4097–4100.
    1. Pittaway DE, Takacs P, Bauguess P. Laparoscopic adnexectomy: a comparison with laparotomy. The American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology. 1994;171(2):385–389, discussion 389–391.
    1. Seracchioli R, Rossi S, Govoni F, et al. Fertility and obstetric outcome after laparoscopic myomectomy of large myomata: a randomized comparison with abdominal myomectomy. Human Reproduction. 2000;15(12):2663–2668.
    1. Advincula AP, Song A, Burke W, Reynolds RK. Preliminary experience with robot-assisted laparoscopic myomectomy. Journal of the American Association of Gynecologic Laparoscopists. 2004;11(4):511–518.
    1. Pitter MC, Anderson P, Blissett A, Pemberton N. Robotic-assisted gynaecological surgery-establishing training criteria; minimizing operative time and blood loss. International Journal of Medical Robotics and Computer Assisted Surgery. 2008;4(2):114–120.
    1. Mao SP, Lai HC, Chang FW, Yu MH, Chang CC. Laparoscopy-assisted robotic myomectomy using the da Vinci system. Taiwanese Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology. 2007;46(2):174–176.
    1. Bocca S, Stadtmauer L, Oehninger S. Uncomplicated full term pregnancy after da Vinci-assisted laparoscopic myomectomy. Reproductive BioMedicine Online. 2007;14(2, article 2613):246–249.
    1. Advincula AP, Xu X, Goudeau S, Ransom SB. Robotic-assisted, laparoscopic, and abdominal myomectomy: a comparison of surgical outcomes. Obstetrics & Gynecology. 2011;117(2, part 1):256–265.
    1. DeFrances CJ, Cullen KA, Kozak LJ. National Hospital Discharge Survey: 2005 annual summary with detailed diagnosis and procedure data. Vital and Health Statistics. Series 13, Data from the National Health Survey. 2007;(165):1–209.
    1. Wu JM, Wechter ME, Geller EJ, Nguyen TV, Visco AG. Hysterectomy rates in the United States, 2003. Obstetrics and Gynecology. 2007;110(5):1091–1095.
    1. Reich H. New techniques in advanced laparoscopic surgery. Bailliere’s Clinical Obstetrics and Gynaecology. 1989;3(3):655–681.
    1. Diaz-Arrastia C, Jurnalov C, Gomez G, Townsend C. Laparoscopic hysterectomy using a computer-enhanced surgical robot. Surgical Endoscopy and Other Interventional Techniques. 2002;16(9):1271–1273.
    1. Marchal F, Rauch P, Vandromme J, et al. Telerobotic-assisted laparoscopic hysterectomy for benign and oncologic pathologies: initial clinical experience with 30 patients. Surgical Endoscopy and Other Interventional Techniques. 2005;19(6):826–831.
    1. Fiorentino RP, Zepeda MA, Goldstein BH, John CR, Rettenmaier MA. Pilot study assessing robotic laparoscopic hysterectomy and patient outcomes. Journal of Minimally Invasive Gynecology. 2006;13(1):60–63.
    1. Advincula AP. Surgical techniques: robot-assisted laparoscopic hysterectomy with the da Vinci® surgical system. International Journal of Medical Robotics and Computer Assisted Surgery. 2006;2(4):305–311.
    1. Kho RM, Hilger WS, Hentz JG, Magtibay PM, Magrina JF. Robotic hysterectomy: technique and initial outcomes. The American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology. 2007;197(1):113 e1–113 e4.
    1. Gocmen A, Sanlikan F, Ucar MG. Turkey’s experience of robotic-assisted laparoscopic hysterectomy: a series of 25 consecutive cases. Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics. 2010;282(2):163–171.
    1. Lenihan JP, Jr., Kovanda C, Seshadri-Kreaden U. What is the learning curve for robotic assisted gynecologic surgery? Journal of Minimally Invasive Gynecology. 2008;15(5):589–594.
    1. Bell MC, Torgerson JL, Kreaden U. The first 100 da Vinci hysterectomies: an analysis of the learning curve for a single surgeon. South Dakota Medicine. 2009;62(3):91–95.
    1. Pasic RP, Rizzo JA, Fang H, Ross S, Moore M, Gunnarsson C. Comparing robot-assisted with conventional laparoscopic hysterectomy: impact on cost and clinical outcomes. Journal of Minimally Invasive Gynecology. 2010;17(6):730–738.
    1. Payne TN, Dauterive FR, Pitter MC, et al. Robotically assisted hysterectomy in patients with large uteri: outcomes in five community practices. Obstetrics and Gynecology. 2010;115(3):535–542.
    1. Boyles SH, Weber AM, Meyn L. Procedures for pelvic organ prolapse in the United States, 1979–1997. The American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology. 2003;188(1):108–115.
    1. Olsen AL, Smith VJ, Bergstrom JO, Colling JC, Clark AL. Epidemiology of surgically managed pelvic organ prolapse and urinary incontinence. Obstetrics and Gynecology. 1997;89(4):501–506.
    1. Nygaard IE, McCreery R, Brubaker L, et al. Abdominal sacrocolpopexy: a comprehensive review. Obstetrics and Gynecology. 2004;104(4):805–823.
    1. DiMarco DS, Chow GK, Gettman MT, Elliott DS. Robotic-assisted laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy for treatment of vaginal vault prolapse. Urology. 2004;63(2):373–376.
    1. Elliott DS, Frank I, DiMarco DS, Chow GK. Gynecologic use of robotically assisted laparoscopy: sacrocolpopexy for the treatment of high-grade vaginal vault prolapse. The American Journal of Surgery. 2004;188(4A):52S–56S.
    1. Elliott DS, Chow GK, Gettman M. Current status of robotics in female urology and gynecology. World Journal of Urology. 2006;24(2):188–192.
    1. Daneshgari F, Kefer JC, Moore C, Kaouk J. Robotic abdominal sacrocolpopexy/sacrouteropexy repair of advanced female pelvic organ prolaspe (POP): utilizing POP-quantification-based staging and outcomes. BJU International. 2007;100(4):875–879.
    1. Chan SS, Pang SM, Cheung TH, Cheung RY, Chung TK. Laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy for the treatment of vaginal vault prolapse: with or without robotic assistance. Hong Kong Medical Journal. 2011;17(1):54–60.
    1. Melamud O, Eichel L, Turbow B, Shanberg A. Laparoscopic vesicovaginal fistula repair with robotic reconstruction. Urology. 2005;65(1):163–166.
    1. Sundaram BM, Kalidasan G, Hemal AK. Robotic repair of vesicovaginal fistula: case series of five patients. Urology. 2006;67(5):970–973.
    1. Laungani R, Patil N, Krane LS, et al. Robotic-assisted ureterovaginal fistula repair: report of efficacy and feasiblity. Journal of Laparoendoscopic and Advanced Surgical Techniques—Part A. 2008;18(5):731–734.
    1. Hemal AK, Kolla SB, Wadhwa P. Robotic reconstruction for recurrent supratrigonal vesicovaginal fistulas. Journal of Urology. 2008;180(3):981–985.
    1. Kim C, Campbell B, Ferrer F. Robotic sigmoid vaginoplasty: a novel technique. Urology. 2008;72(4):847–849.
    1. National Cancer Institute. Endometrial cancer.
    1. Seamon LG, Fowler JM, Cohn DE. Lymphadenectomy for endometrial cancer: the controversy. Gynecologic Oncology. 2010;117(1):6–8.
    1. Barakat RR, Lev G, Hummer AJ, et al. Twelve-year experience in the management of endometrial cancer: a change in surgical and postoperative radiation approaches. Gynecologic Oncology. 2007;105(1):150–156.
    1. Walker JL, Piedmonte MR, Spirtos NM, et al. Laparoscopy compared with laparotomy for comprehensive surgical staging of uterine cancer: Gynecologic Oncology Group Study LAP2. Journal of Clinical Oncology. 2009;27(32):5331–5336.
    1. Kornblith AB, Huang HQ, Walker JL, Spirtos NM, Rotmensch J, Cella D. Quality of life of patients with endometrial cancer undergoing laparoscopic international federation of gynecology and obstetrics staging compared with laparotomy: a Gynecologic Oncology Group study. Journal of Clinical Oncology. 2009;27(32):5337–5342.
    1. Dupont NC, Chandrasekhar R, Wilding G, Guru KA. Current trends in robot assisted surgery: a survey of gynecologic oncologists. International Journal of Medical Robotics and Computer Assisted Surgery. 2010;6(4):468–472.
    1. Holtz DO, Miroshnichenko G, Finnegan MO, Chernick M, Dunton CJ. Endometrial cancer surgery costs: robot vs laparoscopy. Journal of Minimally Invasive Gynecology. 2010;17(4):500–503.
    1. Gocmen A, Sanlikan F, Ucar MG, et al. Comparison of robotic-assisted surgery outcomes with laparotomy for endometrial cancer staging in Turkey. Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics. 2010;282(5):539–545.
    1. Jung YW, Lee DW, Kim SW, et al. Robot-assisted staging using three robotic arms for endometrial cancer: comparison to laparoscopy and laparotomy at a single institution. Journal of Surgical Oncology. 2010;101(2):116–121.
    1. Boggess JF, Gehrig PA, Cantrell L, et al. A comparative study of 3 surgical methods for hysterectomy with staging for endometrial cancer: robotic assistance, laparoscopy, laparotomy. The American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology. 2008;199(4):360 e1–360 e9.
    1. Lim PC, Kang E, Park H. A comparative detail analysis of the learning curve and surgical outcome for robotic hysterectomy with lymphadenectomy versus laparoscopic hysterectomy with lymphadenectomy in treatment of endometrial cancer: a case-matched controlled study of the first one hundred twenty two patients. Gynecologic Oncology. 2011;120(3):413–418.
    1. Veljovich DS, Paley PJ, Drescher CW, Everett EN, Shah C, Peters WA. Robotic surgery in gynecologic oncology: program initiation and outcomes after the first year with comparison with laparotomy for endometrial cancer staging. The American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology. 2008;198(6):679 e9–679 e10.
    1. Gehrig PA, Cantrell LA, Shafer A, Abaid LN, Mendivil A, Boggess JF. What is the optimal minimally invasive surgical procedure for endometrial cancer staging in the obese and morbidly obese woman? Gynecologic Oncology. 2008;111(1):41–45.
    1. Boggess JF, Gehrig PA, Cantrell L, et al. A case-control study of robot-assisted type III radical hysterectomy with pelvic lymph node dissection compared with open radical hysterectomy. The American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology. 2008;199(4):357 e1–357 e7.
    1. Bell MC, Torgerson J, Seshadri-Kreaden U, Suttle AW, Hunt S. Comparison of outcomes and cost for endometrial cancer staging via traditional laparotomy, standard laparoscopy and robotic techniques. Gynecologic Oncology. 2008;111(3):407–411.
    1. DeNardis SA, Holloway RW, Bigsby GE, Pikaart DP, Ahmad S, Finkler NJ. Robotically assisted laparoscopic hysterectomy versus total abdominal hysterectomy and lymphadenectomy for endometrial cancer. Gynecologic Oncology. 2008;111(3):412–417.
    1. Seamon LG, Fowler JM, Cohn DE, et al. Robotic hysterectomy and pelvic-aortic lymphadenectomy for endometrial cancer. Obstetrics and Gynecology. 2008;112(6):1207–1213.
    1. Seamon LG, Bryant SA, Rheaume PS, et al. Comprehensive surgical staging for endometrial cancer in obese patients: comparing robotics and laparotomy. Obstetrics & Gynecology. 2009;114(1):16–21.
    1. Cardenas-Goicoechea J, Adams S, Bhat SB, Randall TC. Surgical outcomes of robotic-assisted surgical staging for endometrial cancer are equivalent to traditional laparoscopic staging at a minimally invasive surgical center. Gynecologic Oncology. 2010;117(2):224–228.
    1. Lim PC, Kang E, Park H, et al. Learning curve and surgical outcome for robotic-assisted hysterectomy with lymphadenectomy: case-matched controlled comparison with laparoscopy and laparotomy for treatment of endometrial cancer. Journal of Minimally Invasive Gynecology. 2010;17(6):739–748.
    1. Magrina JF, Kho RM, Weaver AL, Montero RP, Magtibay PM. Robotic radical hysterectomy: comparison with laparoscopy and laparotomy. Gynecologic Oncology. 2008;109(1):86–91.
    1. Geisler JP, Orr CJ, Khurshid N, Phibbs G, Manahan KJ. Robotically assisted laparoscopic radical hysterectomy compared with open radical hysterectomy. International Journal of Gynecological Cancer. 2010;20(3):438–442.
    1. Estape R, Lambrou N, Diaz R, Estape E, Dunkin N, Rivera A. A case matched analysis of robotic radical hysterectomy with lymphadenectomy compared with laparoscopy and laparotomy. Gynecologic Oncology. 2009;113(3):357–361.
    1. Maggioni A, Minig L, Zanagnolo V, et al. Robotic approach for cervical cancer: comparison with laparotomy: a case control study. Gynecologic Oncology. 2009;115(1):60–64.
    1. Nam EJ, Kim SW, Kim S, et al. A case-control study of robotic radical hysterectomy and pelvic lymphadenectomy using 3 robotic arms compared with abdominal radical hysterectomy in cervical cancer. International Journal of Gynecological Cancer. 2010;20(7):1284–1289.
    1. Sert MB, Abeler V. Robot-assisted laparoscopic radical hysterectomy: comparison with total laparoscopic hysterectomy and abdominal radical hysterectomy; one surgeon’s experience at the Norwegian Radium Hospital. Gynecologic Oncology. 2011;121(3):600–604.
    1. Tinelli R, Malzoni M, Cosentino F, et al. Robotics versus laparoscopic radical hysterectomy with lymphadenectomy in patients with early cervical cancer: a multicenter study. Annals of Surgical Oncology. 2011;18(9):2622–2628.
    1. Magrina JF, Pawlina W, Kho RM, Magtibay PM. Robotic nerve-sparing radical hysterectomy: feasibility and technique. Gynecologic Oncology. 2011;121(3):605–609.
    1. Barnett JC, Judd JP, Wu JM, Scales CD, Myers ER, Havrilesky LJ. Cost comparison among robotic, laparoscopic, and open hysterectomy for endometrial cancer. Obstetrics and Gynecology. 2010;116(3):685–693.
    1. Frumovitz M, Dos Reis R, Sun CC, et al. Comparison of total laparoscopic and abdominal radical hysterectomy for patients with early-stage cervical cancer. Obstetrics and Gynecology. 2007;110(1):96–102.
    1. Ramirez PT, Slomovitz BM, Soliman PT, Coleman RL, Levenback C. Total laparoscopic radical hysterectomy and lymphadenectomy: the M. D. Anderson Cancer Center experience. Gynecologic Oncology. 2006;102(2):252–255.
    1. Sert BM, Abeler VM. Robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical hysterectomy (Piver type III) with pelvic node dissection—case report. European Journal of Gynaecological Oncology. 2006;27(5):531–533.
    1. Sert B, Abeler V. Robotic radical hysterectomy in early-stage cervical carcinoma patients, comparing results with total laparoscopic radical hysterectomy cases. The future is now? International Journal of Medical Robotics and Computer Assisted Surgery. 2007;3(3):224–228.
    1. Fanning J, Fenton B, Purohit M. Robotic radical hysterectomy. The American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology. 2008;198(6):649 e1–649 e4.
    1. Lowe MP, Chamberlain DH, Kamelle SA, Johnson PR, Tillmanns TD. A multi-institutional experience with robotic-assisted radical hysterectomy for early stage cervical cancer. Gynecologic Oncology. 2009;113(2):191–194.
    1. Kim YT, Kim SW, Hyung WJ, Lee SJ, Nam EJ, Lee WJ. Robotic radical hysterectomy with pelvic lymphadenectomy for cervical carcinoma: a pilot study. Gynecologic Oncology. 2008;108(2):312–316.
    1. Persson J, Reynisson P, Borgfeldt C, Kannisto P, Lindahl B, Bossmar T. Robot assisted laparoscopic radical hysterectomy and pelvic lymphadenectomy with short and long term morbidity data. Gynecologic Oncology. 2009;113(2):185–190.
    1. Yim GW, Kim SW, Nam EJ, Kim YT. Role of robot-assisted surgery in cervical cancer. International Journal of Gynecological Cancer. 2011;21(1):173–181.
    1. Ko EM, Muto MG, Berkowitz RS, Feltmate CM. Robotic versus open radical hysterectomy: a comparative study at a single institution. Gynecologic Oncology. 2008;111(3):425–430.
    1. Lambaudie E, Houvenaeghel G, Walz J, et al. Robot-assisted laparoscopy in gynecologic oncology. Surgical Endoscopy and Other Interventional Techniques. 2008;22(12):2743–2747.
    1. Nezhat FR, Datta MS, Liu C, Chuang L, Zakashansky K. Robotic radical hysterectomy versus total laparoscopic radical hysterectomy with pelvic lymphadenectomy for treatment of early cervical cancer. Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons. 2008;12(3):227–237.
    1. Lambaudie E, Narducci F, Bannier M, et al. Role of robot-assisted laparoscopy in adjuvant surgery for locally advanced cervical cancer. European Journal of Surgical Oncology. 2010;36(4):409–413.
    1. Schreuder HWR, Zweemer RP, Van Baal WM, Van De Lande J, Dijkstra JC, Verheijen RHM. From open radical hysterectomy to robot-assisted laparoscopic radical hysterectomy for early stage cervical cancer: aspects of a single institution learning curve. Gynecological Surgery. 2010;7(3):253–258.
    1. Obermair A, Gebski V, Frumovitz M, et al. A phase III randomized clinical trial comparing laparoscopic or robotic radical hysterectomy with abdominal radical hysterectomy in patients with early stage cervical cancer. Journal of Minimally Invasive Gynecology. 2008;15(5):584–588.
    1. Geisler JP, Orr CJ, Manahan KJ. Robotically assisted total laparoscopic radical trachelectomy for fertility sparing in stage IB1 adenosarcoma of the cervix. Journal of Laparoendoscopic and Advanced Surgical Techniques. 2008;18(5):727–729.
    1. Chuang LT, Lerner DL, Liu CS, Nezhat FR. Fertility-sparing robotic-assisted radical trachelectomy and bilateral pelvic lymphadenectomy in early-stage cervical cancer. Journal of Minimally Invasive Gynecology. 2008;15(6):767–770.
    1. Persson J, Kannisto P, Bossmar T. Robot-assisted abdominal laparoscopic radical trachelectomy. Gynecologic Oncology. 2008;111(3):564–567.
    1. Burnett AF, Stone PJ, Duckworth LA, Roman JJ. Robotic radical trachelectomy for preservation of fertility in early cervical cancer: case series and description of technique. Journal of Minimally Invasive Gynecology. 2009;16(5):569–572.
    1. Ramirez PT, Schmeler KM, Malpica A, Soliman PT. Safety and feasibility of robotic radical trachelectomy in patients with early-stage cervical cancer. Gynecologic Oncology. 2010;116(3):512–515.
    1. Ramirez PT, Schmeler KM, Wolf JK, Brown J, Soliman PT. Robotic radical parametrectomy and pelvic lymphadenectomy in patients with invasive cervical cancer. Gynecologic Oncology. 2008;111(1):18–21.
    1. Al-Niaimi AN, Einstein MH, Perry L, Hartenbach EM, Kushner DM. Uterine artery sparing robotic radical trachelectomy (AS-RRT) for early cancer of the cervix. International Journal of Gynaecology and Obstetrics. 2011;112(1):76–80.
    1. Vergote I, Pouseele B, Van Gorp T, et al. Robotic retroperitoneal lower para-aortic lymphadenectomy in cervical carcinoma: first report on the technique used in 5 patients. Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica. 2008;87(7):783–787.
    1. Fastrez M, Vandromme J, George P, Rozenberg S, Degueldre M. Robot assisted laparoscopic transperitoneal para-aortic lymphadenectomy in the management of advanced cervical carcinoma. European Journal of Obstetrics Gynecology and Reproductive Biology. 2009;147(2):226–229.
    1. Lambaudie E, Narducci F, Leblanc E, Bannier M, Houvenaeghel G. Robotically-assisted laparoscopic anterior pelvic exenteration for recurrent cervical cancer: report of three first cases. Gynecologic Oncology. 2010;116(3):582–583.
    1. Davis MA, Adams S, Eun D, Lee D, Randall TC. Robotic-assisted laparoscopic exenteration in recurrent cervical cancer Robotics improved the surgical experience for 2 women with recurrent cervical cancer. The American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology. 2010;202(6):663–e1.
    1. Lim PCW. Robotic assisted total pelvic exenteration: a case report. Gynecologic Oncology. 2009;115(2):310–311.
    1. Jemal A, Siegel R, Xu J, Ward E. Cancer statistics, 2010. CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians. 2010;60(5):277–300.
    1. Field JB, Benoit MF, Dinh TA, Diaz-Arrastia C. Computer-enhanced robotic surgery in gynecologic oncology. Surgical Endoscopy and Other Interventional Techniques. 2007;21(2):244–246.
    1. Magrina JF, Zanagnolo V, Noble BN, Kho RM, Magtibay P. Robotic approach for ovarian cancer: perioperative and survival results and comparison with laparoscopy and laparotomy. Gynecologic Oncology. 2011;121(1):100–105.
    1. Iglesias DA, Ramirez PT. Role of minimally invasive surgery in staging of ovarian cancer. Current Treatment Options in Oncology. 2011;12(3):217–229.
    1. ACOG technology assessment in obstetrics and gynecology No. 6: robot-assisted surgery. Obstetrics & Gynecology. 2009;114(5):1153–1155.

Source: PubMed

スポンサーと協力者

医学的状態

薬物療法

3
購読する