Display Settings:

Format

Send to:

Choose Destination
See comment in PubMed Commons below
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2008 Oct;199(4):357.e1-7. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2008.06.058.

A case-control study of robot-assisted type III radical hysterectomy with pelvic lymph node dissection compared with open radical hysterectomy.

Author information

  • 1Division of Gynecology Oncology, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, UNC School of Medicine, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC 27599, USA. jboggess@med.unc.edu

Abstract

OBJECTIVE:

The purpose of this study was to compare robotically assisted hysterectomy (RAH) with open (ORH) type III radical hysterectomy in the treatment of early-stage cervical cancer.

STUDY DESIGN:

The outcomes of 51 consecutive patients who underwent RAH were compared with the outcomes of 49 patients who underwent ORH.

RESULTS:

There were no differences with regard to patient demographics. There were significant differences between the groups with regard to operative blood loss (P < .0001), operative time (P = .0002), and lymph node retrieval (P = .0003), all of which were in favor of the RAH cohort. All patients with RAH were discharged on postoperative day 1, compared with a 3.2-day average hospitalization for the cohort with ORH. The incidence of postoperative complications was 7.8% and 16.3% for the RAH and ORH cohorts, respectively (P = .35).

CONCLUSION:

Robotic type III radical hysterectomy with pelvic node dissection is feasible and may be preferable over open radical hysterectomy in patients with early-stage cervical cancer. Further study will determine procedure generalizability and long-term oncologic outcomes.

Comment in

PMID:
18928973
[PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
PubMed Commons home

PubMed Commons

0 comments
How to join PubMed Commons

    Supplemental Content

    Full text links

    Icon for Elsevier Science
    Loading ...
    Write to the Help Desk