The clinical experience of robot-assisted surgery in gynecologic cancer.

The comparison of robotic and conventional laparoscopic hysterectomy and pelvic lymphadenectomy in gynecologic cancer still needs to be studied. In all, 98 consecutive cases of patients with gynecologic cancer undergoing robot-assisted hysterectomy and pelvic lymphadenectomy, and another 98 consecutive cases of conventional laparoscopic hysterectomy and pelvic lymphadenectomy during the same period in the Obstetrics and Gynecology Hospital of Fudan University were included. The duration of the operation, blood loss, drainage during the first 24 h after the operation, total hospital stay, hospital stay after the operation, lymph nodes collected, perioperative complications, and the cost of each operation for both procedures were recorded. The duration of the operation was longer, and the cost of each operation was almost seven times higher in the robot group than that in the conventional laparoscopy group. But the differences with regard to blood loss, drainage during the first 24 h after the operation, total hospital stay, hospital stay after operation, the lymph nodes collected, and the rate of perioperative complications were not statistically significant. Robot-assisted surgery (RAS) in gynecologic cancer is as feasible as conventional laparoscopic surgery. We recommend further studies about the cost and effect of RAS in gynecologic cancer.ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHERCopyright of Minimally Invasive Therapy & Allied Technologies is the property of Taylor & Francis Ltd and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]