Short- and long-term morbidity and outcomes after robotic surgery for comprehensive endometrial cancer staging.
ABSTRACT Although intra-operative and immediate postoperative complications of robotic surgery are relatively low, little is known about long-term morbidity. We set out to assess both short- and long-term morbidities after robotic surgery for endometrial cancer staging.
All patients who underwent robotic staging for EMCA between 2006 and 2009 from two institutions were identified. Patient charts were retrospectively reviewed for surgical complications and postoperative morbidities.
Five hundred three patients were identified. No differences in complication rates were found between 2006-2007 and 2008-2009, even though the median BMI increased from 29.9 (range 19-52) to 32 (range 17-70) (p=0.03). 6.4% of cases were converted to laparotomy. Median length of stay was one day (range 1-46). No cystotomies, two enterotomies, one ureteric injury, and five vessel injuries occurred (1.6% intra-operative complications). Thirty-eight (7.6%) patients developed major postoperative complications, 11 (2.2%) had wound infections, and 15 (3%) required a transfusion in the 30-day peri-operative period. The total venous thromboembolism (VTE) rate for robotic cases was 1.7%. Partial cuff dehiscence managed conservatively occurred in 5 (1%) and complete dehiscence requiring closure in 7 (1.4%) patients; Sixty-three (13.4%) patients who had robotic staging developed lymphedema, with 40 (8%) requiring physical therapy.
This study provides one of the largest cohorts of patients with robotic-assisted hysterectomy and lymphadenectomy (in 92.6%) with an assessment of morbidity. Our data demonstrates that robotic surgical staging can be safely performed with a low risk of short-term complications and lymphedema is the most frequent long-term morbidity.
- SourceAvailable from: Rainer Kimmig[show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: The technique of compartment-based radical hysterectomy was originally described by M Hockel as total mesometrial resection (TMMR) for standard treatment of stage I and II cervical cancer. However, with regard to the ontogenetically-defined compartments of tumor development (Mullerian) and lymph drainage (Mullerian and mesonephric), compartments at risk may also be defined consistently in endometrial cancer. This is the first report in the literature on the compartment-based surgical approach to endometrial cancer. Peritoneal mesometrial resection (PMMR) with therapeutic lymphadenectomy (tLNE) as an ontogenetic, compartment-based oncologic surgery could be beneficial for patients in terms of surgical radicalness as well as complication rates; it can be standardized for compartment-confined tumors. Supported by M Hockel, PMMR was translated to robotic surgery (rPMMR) and described step-by-step in comparison to robotic TMMR (rTMMR). Patients (n = 42) were treated by rPMMR (n = 39) or extrafascial simple hysterectomy (n = 3) with/without bilateral pelvic and/or periaortic robotic therapeutic lymphadenectomy (rtLNE) for stage I to III endometrial cancer, according to International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) classification. Tumors were classified as intermediate/high-risk in 22 out of 40 patients (55%) and low-risk in 18 out of 40 patients (45%), and two patients showed other uterine malignancies. In 11 patients, no adjuvant external radiotherapy was performed, but chemotherapy was applied. No transition to open surgery was necessary. There were no intraoperative complications. The postoperative complication rate was 12% with venous thromboses, (n = 2), infected pelvic lymph cyst (n = 1), transient aphasia (n = 1) and transient dysfunction of micturition (n = 1). The mean difference in perioperative hemoglobin concentrations was 2.4 g/dL (+/- 1.2 g/dL) and one patient (2.4%) required transfusion. During follow-up (median 17 months), one patient experienced distant recurrence and one patient distant/regional recurrence of endometrial cancer (4.8%), but none developed isolated locoregional recurrence. There were two deaths from endometrial cancer during the observation period (4.8%). We conclude that rPMMR and rtLNE are feasible and safe with regard to perioperative morbidity, thus, it seems promising for the treatment of intermediate/high-risk endometrial cancer in terms of surgical radicalness and complication rates. This could be particularly beneficial for morbidly obese and seriously ill patients.World Journal of Surgical Oncology 08/2013; 11(1):198. · 1.09 Impact Factor
- [show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Minimally invasive surgery has been utilized in the field of obstetrics and gynecology as far back as the 1940s when culdoscopy was first introduced as a visualization tool. Gynecologists then began to employ minimally invasive surgery for adhesiolysis and obtaining biopsies but then expanded its use to include procedures such as tubal sterilization (Clyman (1963), L. E. Smale and M. L. Smale (1973), Thompson and Wheeless (1971), Peterson and Behrman (1971)). With advances in instrumentation, the first laparoscopic hysterectomy was successfully performed in 1989 by Reich et al. At the same time, minimally invasive surgery in gynecologic oncology was being developed alongside its benign counterpart. In the 1975s, Rosenoff et al. reported using peritoneoscopy for pretreatment evaluation in ovarian cancer, and Spinelli et al. reported on using laparoscopy for the staging of ovarian cancer. In 1993, Nichols used operative laparoscopy to perform pelvic lymphadenectomy in cervical cancer patients. The initial goals of minimally invasive surgery, not dissimilar to those of modern medicine, were to decrease the morbidity and mortality associated with surgery and therefore improve patient outcomes and patient satisfaction. This review will summarize the history and use of minimally invasive surgery in gynecologic oncology and also highlight new minimally invasive surgical approaches currently in development.ISRN obstetrics and gynecology 01/2013; 2013:312982.
- [show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Introduction. This study was designed to confirm the feasibility and safety of robotic-assisted transperitoneal aortic lymphadenectomy as part of staging procedure for gynecologic malignancies. Methods. Chart review of 51 patients who had undergone robotic staging with aortic lymphadenectomy for different gynaecologic malignancies was performed. Results. The primary diagnosis was as follows: 6 cases of endometrial cancer, 31 epithelial ovarian cancer, 9 nonepithelial ovarian cancer, 4 tubal cancer, and 1 cervical cancer. Median BMI was 23 kg/m(2). Except for a single case of aortic lymphadenectomy only, both aortic and pelvic lymphadenectomies were performed at the time of the staging procedure. All the para-aortic lymphadenectomies were carried out to the level of the renal veinl but 6 cases were carried out to the level of the inferior mesenteric artery. Hysterectomy was performed in 24 patiens (47%). There was no conversion to LPT. The median console time was 285 (range 195-402) with a significant difference between patients who underwent hysterectomy and those who did not. The median estimated blood loss was 50 mL (range 20-200). The mean number of removed nodes was 29 ± 9.6. The mean number of pelvic nodes was 15 ± 7.6, whereas the mean number of para-aortic nodes was 14 ± 6.6. Conclusions. Robotic transperitoneal infrarenal aortic lymphadenectomy as part of staging procedure is feasible and can be safely performed. Additional trocars are needed when pelvic surgery is also performed.Obstetrics and Gynecology International 01/2013; 2013:931318.