Surgical staging of endometrial cancer: Robotic versus open technique outcomes in a contemporary single surgeon series

Meenu Goel, Terrell W. Zollinger, David H. Moore

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    4 Citations (Scopus)

    Abstract

    Patients prefer robotic surgery due to perceived cosmetic advantages and quicker resumption of regular activity. We compared the results of hysterectomy and surgical staging for endometrial cancer using robotic versus open techniques in patients operated on by a single surgeon. A retrospective clinical data analysis was performed of all patients who underwent surgical staging for endometrial cancer. Patients selected for open techniques underwent surgery between January 2003 and December 2005, whereas patients selected for da Vinci robotic surgery were operated on between June 2006 and June 2008. The study was approved by the Institutional Review Board (IRB). The preoperative diagnosis of endometrial cancer was confirmed using endometrial biopsy. Data were collected and comparative analyses were made using mean or chi-squared test or other appropriate statistical techniques. The study population consisted of 97 patients (open, N = 38; robotic, N = 59). Mean age was 66.5 ± 1.97 versus 59.5 ± 1.43 years, mean parity was 2.11 versus 1.93, and mean body mass index (BMI) was 32.2 ± 2.03 versus 39.3 ± 2.03 (P = 0.02) for open versus robotic surgery, respectively. Operating time and lymph node (LN) yield was 175.24 ± 4.6 versus 185.27 ± 4.4 min, number of pelvic LNs were 8.6 versus 11.34, and aortic LNs were 3.5 versus 1.9 in the open versus robotic groups, respectively. Although mean BMI was higher, blood loss, complications, and hospital stay were significantly lower for patients undergoing robotic surgery. Overall, complications occurred in 5/38 (13%) patients in the open group and 2/59 (3%) patients in the robotic group. Of the two complications in the robotic group, there was one injury to the external iliac vein requiring open surgical management with blood transfusion resulting in a hospital stay of 7 days; however, no other patient required blood transfusion in either surgical group. Robotic surgery results in less blood loss and shorter hospital stay and yields comparable number of lymph nodes, which are adequate for staging. It also results in reduced surgical risks in patients with higher BMI who are prone to higher co-morbidities. Robotic surgery is a useful minimally invasive tool for the comprehensive surgical staging of patients with endometrial cancer.

    Original languageEnglish (US)
    Pages (from-to)109-114
    Number of pages6
    JournalJournal of Robotic Surgery
    Volume5
    Issue number2
    DOIs
    StatePublished - Jun 2011

    Fingerprint

    Robotics
    Endometrial Neoplasms
    Length of Stay
    Body Mass Index
    Blood Transfusion
    Surgeons
    Lymph Nodes
    Iliac Vein
    Research Ethics Committees
    Parity
    Hysterectomy
    Cosmetics
    Morbidity
    Biopsy

    Keywords

    • Cancer
    • Endometrial
    • Open
    • Robotic
    • Staging

    ASJC Scopus subject areas

    • Surgery
    • Health Informatics

    Cite this

    Surgical staging of endometrial cancer : Robotic versus open technique outcomes in a contemporary single surgeon series. / Goel, Meenu; Zollinger, Terrell W.; Moore, David H.

    In: Journal of Robotic Surgery, Vol. 5, No. 2, 06.2011, p. 109-114.

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    Goel, Meenu ; Zollinger, Terrell W. ; Moore, David H. / Surgical staging of endometrial cancer : Robotic versus open technique outcomes in a contemporary single surgeon series. In: Journal of Robotic Surgery. 2011 ; Vol. 5, No. 2. pp. 109-114.
    @article{6bd7d907b8d141ed9655007cea52bf2b,
    title = "Surgical staging of endometrial cancer: Robotic versus open technique outcomes in a contemporary single surgeon series",
    abstract = "Patients prefer robotic surgery due to perceived cosmetic advantages and quicker resumption of regular activity. We compared the results of hysterectomy and surgical staging for endometrial cancer using robotic versus open techniques in patients operated on by a single surgeon. A retrospective clinical data analysis was performed of all patients who underwent surgical staging for endometrial cancer. Patients selected for open techniques underwent surgery between January 2003 and December 2005, whereas patients selected for da Vinci robotic surgery were operated on between June 2006 and June 2008. The study was approved by the Institutional Review Board (IRB). The preoperative diagnosis of endometrial cancer was confirmed using endometrial biopsy. Data were collected and comparative analyses were made using mean or chi-squared test or other appropriate statistical techniques. The study population consisted of 97 patients (open, N = 38; robotic, N = 59). Mean age was 66.5 ± 1.97 versus 59.5 ± 1.43 years, mean parity was 2.11 versus 1.93, and mean body mass index (BMI) was 32.2 ± 2.03 versus 39.3 ± 2.03 (P = 0.02) for open versus robotic surgery, respectively. Operating time and lymph node (LN) yield was 175.24 ± 4.6 versus 185.27 ± 4.4 min, number of pelvic LNs were 8.6 versus 11.34, and aortic LNs were 3.5 versus 1.9 in the open versus robotic groups, respectively. Although mean BMI was higher, blood loss, complications, and hospital stay were significantly lower for patients undergoing robotic surgery. Overall, complications occurred in 5/38 (13{\%}) patients in the open group and 2/59 (3{\%}) patients in the robotic group. Of the two complications in the robotic group, there was one injury to the external iliac vein requiring open surgical management with blood transfusion resulting in a hospital stay of 7 days; however, no other patient required blood transfusion in either surgical group. Robotic surgery results in less blood loss and shorter hospital stay and yields comparable number of lymph nodes, which are adequate for staging. It also results in reduced surgical risks in patients with higher BMI who are prone to higher co-morbidities. Robotic surgery is a useful minimally invasive tool for the comprehensive surgical staging of patients with endometrial cancer.",
    keywords = "Cancer, Endometrial, Open, Robotic, Staging",
    author = "Meenu Goel and Zollinger, {Terrell W.} and Moore, {David H.}",
    year = "2011",
    month = "6",
    doi = "10.1007/s11701-010-0239-2",
    language = "English (US)",
    volume = "5",
    pages = "109--114",
    journal = "Journal of Robotic Surgery",
    issn = "1863-2483",
    publisher = "Springer London",
    number = "2",

    }

    TY - JOUR

    T1 - Surgical staging of endometrial cancer

    T2 - Robotic versus open technique outcomes in a contemporary single surgeon series

    AU - Goel, Meenu

    AU - Zollinger, Terrell W.

    AU - Moore, David H.

    PY - 2011/6

    Y1 - 2011/6

    N2 - Patients prefer robotic surgery due to perceived cosmetic advantages and quicker resumption of regular activity. We compared the results of hysterectomy and surgical staging for endometrial cancer using robotic versus open techniques in patients operated on by a single surgeon. A retrospective clinical data analysis was performed of all patients who underwent surgical staging for endometrial cancer. Patients selected for open techniques underwent surgery between January 2003 and December 2005, whereas patients selected for da Vinci robotic surgery were operated on between June 2006 and June 2008. The study was approved by the Institutional Review Board (IRB). The preoperative diagnosis of endometrial cancer was confirmed using endometrial biopsy. Data were collected and comparative analyses were made using mean or chi-squared test or other appropriate statistical techniques. The study population consisted of 97 patients (open, N = 38; robotic, N = 59). Mean age was 66.5 ± 1.97 versus 59.5 ± 1.43 years, mean parity was 2.11 versus 1.93, and mean body mass index (BMI) was 32.2 ± 2.03 versus 39.3 ± 2.03 (P = 0.02) for open versus robotic surgery, respectively. Operating time and lymph node (LN) yield was 175.24 ± 4.6 versus 185.27 ± 4.4 min, number of pelvic LNs were 8.6 versus 11.34, and aortic LNs were 3.5 versus 1.9 in the open versus robotic groups, respectively. Although mean BMI was higher, blood loss, complications, and hospital stay were significantly lower for patients undergoing robotic surgery. Overall, complications occurred in 5/38 (13%) patients in the open group and 2/59 (3%) patients in the robotic group. Of the two complications in the robotic group, there was one injury to the external iliac vein requiring open surgical management with blood transfusion resulting in a hospital stay of 7 days; however, no other patient required blood transfusion in either surgical group. Robotic surgery results in less blood loss and shorter hospital stay and yields comparable number of lymph nodes, which are adequate for staging. It also results in reduced surgical risks in patients with higher BMI who are prone to higher co-morbidities. Robotic surgery is a useful minimally invasive tool for the comprehensive surgical staging of patients with endometrial cancer.

    AB - Patients prefer robotic surgery due to perceived cosmetic advantages and quicker resumption of regular activity. We compared the results of hysterectomy and surgical staging for endometrial cancer using robotic versus open techniques in patients operated on by a single surgeon. A retrospective clinical data analysis was performed of all patients who underwent surgical staging for endometrial cancer. Patients selected for open techniques underwent surgery between January 2003 and December 2005, whereas patients selected for da Vinci robotic surgery were operated on between June 2006 and June 2008. The study was approved by the Institutional Review Board (IRB). The preoperative diagnosis of endometrial cancer was confirmed using endometrial biopsy. Data were collected and comparative analyses were made using mean or chi-squared test or other appropriate statistical techniques. The study population consisted of 97 patients (open, N = 38; robotic, N = 59). Mean age was 66.5 ± 1.97 versus 59.5 ± 1.43 years, mean parity was 2.11 versus 1.93, and mean body mass index (BMI) was 32.2 ± 2.03 versus 39.3 ± 2.03 (P = 0.02) for open versus robotic surgery, respectively. Operating time and lymph node (LN) yield was 175.24 ± 4.6 versus 185.27 ± 4.4 min, number of pelvic LNs were 8.6 versus 11.34, and aortic LNs were 3.5 versus 1.9 in the open versus robotic groups, respectively. Although mean BMI was higher, blood loss, complications, and hospital stay were significantly lower for patients undergoing robotic surgery. Overall, complications occurred in 5/38 (13%) patients in the open group and 2/59 (3%) patients in the robotic group. Of the two complications in the robotic group, there was one injury to the external iliac vein requiring open surgical management with blood transfusion resulting in a hospital stay of 7 days; however, no other patient required blood transfusion in either surgical group. Robotic surgery results in less blood loss and shorter hospital stay and yields comparable number of lymph nodes, which are adequate for staging. It also results in reduced surgical risks in patients with higher BMI who are prone to higher co-morbidities. Robotic surgery is a useful minimally invasive tool for the comprehensive surgical staging of patients with endometrial cancer.

    KW - Cancer

    KW - Endometrial

    KW - Open

    KW - Robotic

    KW - Staging

    UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=79957512270&partnerID=8YFLogxK

    UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=79957512270&partnerID=8YFLogxK

    U2 - 10.1007/s11701-010-0239-2

    DO - 10.1007/s11701-010-0239-2

    M3 - Article

    AN - SCOPUS:79957512270

    VL - 5

    SP - 109

    EP - 114

    JO - Journal of Robotic Surgery

    JF - Journal of Robotic Surgery

    SN - 1863-2483

    IS - 2

    ER -