Minimally Invasive Techniques for Treating Gynecologic Malignancies

Fader, Amanda N.

doi:10.6004/jnccn.2017.0086

Cited by 2 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Despite level-one evidence showing advantages of minimally invasive hysterectomy over laparotomy, scant data compare outcomes between different MIGS [5,11,12]. Currently, gynecologists choose the surgical approach based on their personal preference [2].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Surgical and Patient Outcomes of Robotic Versus Conventional Laparoscopic Hysterectomy: A Systematic Review

Alshowaikh¹,

Karpinska-Leydier²,

Amirthalingam³

et al. 2021

Cureus

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Hysterectomy is a commonly performed gynecologic surgery that can be associated with significant morbidity and mortality. However, the evolution of the surgical approach, from open to minimally invasive gynecologic surgery (MIGS), has substantially improved patient outcomes by reducing perioperative complications, pain, and length of hospitalization. The evident advantages and the approval of the da Vinci Surgical System by the Food and Drug Administration led to the exponential rise in the use of MIGS. In particular, robotic hysterectomy (RH) witnessed unparalleled popularity compared to other MIGS despite the lack of strong evidence demonstrating its superiority. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review of the literature to evaluate and compare various patient and surgical outcomes of RH with conventional laparoscopic hysterectomy (CLH), including operating time, estimated blood loss, length of hospitalization, overall complications, survival, and cost. Overall, the outcomes were comparable between RH and CLH except concerning cost. RH is significantly more expensive than CLH due to the higher costs of robotic equipment, including disposable instruments, equipment maintenance, and sterilization. Although RH demonstrated comparable outcomes and higher costs, its technical advantages such as improved ergonomics, three-dimensional view, a wider range of wristed mobility, mechanical lifting of robot's hand, and greater stability might benefit patient subsets (e.g., obesity, large uterine weights >750 g). Therefore, large and multicentered randomized control trials are imperative to determine the most effective surgical approach between RH and other MIGS for different patient subsets.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Surgical and Patient Outcomes of Robotic Versus Conventional Laparoscopic Hysterectomy: A Systematic Review

Alshowaikh¹,

Karpinska-Leydier²,

Amirthalingam³

et al. 2021

Cureus

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Surgical cytoreduction remains paramount in the treatment of early-stage and advanced endometrial cancer. MIS was approved as a quality measure by the Society of Gynecologic Oncology (SGO) in 2014 and incorporated into the National Comprehensive Cancer Network's (NCCN) guidelines in 2017 [6,7]. Globally, a recent U.S. Centers for Disease Control (CDC) study demonstrated that endometrial cancer rates increased in 26 of the 43 countries, with South Africa and several countries in Asia showing the largest increase [8].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%