Robot-assisted versus conventional laparoscopic hysterectomy in endometrial cancer: An observational study in a French tertiary teaching hospital at the beginning of the learning curve

IF 1.7 4区 医学 Q3 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY
Emma Bajeux , Stéphanie Hamonic , Solène Brunet-Houdard , Krystel Nyangoh Timoh , Ludivine Dion , Alexia Guecheff , Vincent Lavoue
{"title":"Robot-assisted versus conventional laparoscopic hysterectomy in endometrial cancer: An observational study in a French tertiary teaching hospital at the beginning of the learning curve","authors":"Emma Bajeux ,&nbsp;Stéphanie Hamonic ,&nbsp;Solène Brunet-Houdard ,&nbsp;Krystel Nyangoh Timoh ,&nbsp;Ludivine Dion ,&nbsp;Alexia Guecheff ,&nbsp;Vincent Lavoue","doi":"10.1016/j.jogoh.2025.102917","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><div>The role of Robotic Assisted Laparoscopy (RAL) versus conventional laparoscopy (CL) in the surgical treatment of endometrial cancer remains a matter of debate. We aimed to compare RAL and CL in terms of clinical outcomes (hospital stay characteristics and 3-month complications) in patients undergoing hysterectomy for endometrial cancer.</div></div><div><h3>Materials and Methods</h3><div>We conducted a single-center, retrospective study in a tertiary teaching hospital comparing two groups of women who underwent hysterectomy for endometrial carcinoma by RAL performed by a surgeon during the beginning of learning curve, or CL.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Of the 110 patients included, 56 were in the RAL group and 54 in the CL group. The patients in the RAL group were significantly older (71.6±8.7 vs 67.8±9.7, p=0.031) and had a higher BMI (33.1±7.0 vs 29.8±6.1, p=0.030) than those in the CL group. Operating room occupancy time was higher with RAL (4.6 hours±1.3 vs 3.5±1.3, p&lt;0.001). Although less spinal analgesia was used in the RAL group (35% vs 74%, p&lt;0.001), the patients in this group consumed less postoperative paracetamol (9.4g±5.3 vs 13.0±9.9, p=0.032) meaning faster recovery. Conversely, there was a higher rate of unplanned consultations during the 3-month follow-up in the RAL vs CL group (18.5% vs 3.6%, p=0.012).</div></div><div><h3>Discussion</h3><div>RAL was associated with less postoperative pain even at the beginning of learning curve. Surgeons were more likely to perform RAL than CL for older and/or obese patients, suggesting they intuitively consider RAL of added benefit for these patients.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":15871,"journal":{"name":"Journal of gynecology obstetrics and human reproduction","volume":"54 4","pages":"Article 102917"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of gynecology obstetrics and human reproduction","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2468784725000145","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction

The role of Robotic Assisted Laparoscopy (RAL) versus conventional laparoscopy (CL) in the surgical treatment of endometrial cancer remains a matter of debate. We aimed to compare RAL and CL in terms of clinical outcomes (hospital stay characteristics and 3-month complications) in patients undergoing hysterectomy for endometrial cancer.

Materials and Methods

We conducted a single-center, retrospective study in a tertiary teaching hospital comparing two groups of women who underwent hysterectomy for endometrial carcinoma by RAL performed by a surgeon during the beginning of learning curve, or CL.

Results

Of the 110 patients included, 56 were in the RAL group and 54 in the CL group. The patients in the RAL group were significantly older (71.6±8.7 vs 67.8±9.7, p=0.031) and had a higher BMI (33.1±7.0 vs 29.8±6.1, p=0.030) than those in the CL group. Operating room occupancy time was higher with RAL (4.6 hours±1.3 vs 3.5±1.3, p<0.001). Although less spinal analgesia was used in the RAL group (35% vs 74%, p<0.001), the patients in this group consumed less postoperative paracetamol (9.4g±5.3 vs 13.0±9.9, p=0.032) meaning faster recovery. Conversely, there was a higher rate of unplanned consultations during the 3-month follow-up in the RAL vs CL group (18.5% vs 3.6%, p=0.012).

Discussion

RAL was associated with less postoperative pain even at the beginning of learning curve. Surgeons were more likely to perform RAL than CL for older and/or obese patients, suggesting they intuitively consider RAL of added benefit for these patients.
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of gynecology obstetrics and human reproduction
Journal of gynecology obstetrics and human reproduction Medicine-Obstetrics and Gynecology
CiteScore
3.70
自引率
5.30%
发文量
210
审稿时长
31 days
期刊介绍: Formerly known as Journal de Gynécologie Obstétrique et Biologie de la Reproduction, Journal of Gynecology Obstetrics and Human Reproduction is the official Academic publication of the French College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (Collège National des Gynécologues et Obstétriciens Français / CNGOF). J Gynecol Obstet Hum Reprod publishes monthly, in English, research papers and techniques in the fields of Gynecology, Obstetrics, Neonatology and Human Reproduction: (guest) editorials, original articles, reviews, updates, technical notes, case reports, letters to the editor and guidelines. Original works include clinical or laboratory investigations and clinical or equipment reports. Reviews include narrative reviews, systematic reviews and meta-analyses.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信