Premium
Robotic vs laparoscopic radical hysterectomy for cervical cancer: a meta‐analysis
Author(s) -
Zhou Jing,
Xiong Bing Hong,
Ma Li,
Cheng Yong,
Huang Wei,
Zhao Lin
Publication year - 2016
Publication title -
the international journal of medical robotics and computer assisted surgery
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.556
H-Index - 53
eISSN - 1478-596X
pISSN - 1478-5951
DOI - 10.1002/rcs.1652
Subject(s) - medicine , cervical cancer , radical hysterectomy , hysterectomy , blood loss , cochrane library , randomized controlled trial , laparoscopy , meta analysis , surgery , general surgery , cancer
Background To evaluate whether the safety and efficacy of robotic radical hysterectomy (RRH) in patients with cervical cancer (CC) are equivalent to those of laparoscopic radical hysterectomy (LRH). Methods The Pubmed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Ovid and Web of Science databases were searched. Studies documenting a comparison of RRH with LRH for CC were selected. Operative and recovery outcomes, common morbidity, and oncological parameters were evaluated. Results Compared with LRH, RRH was associated with less blood loss and shorter hospital stay. There were no significant differences in operative time, complications, mortality, transfusion, conversions, number of retrieved lymph nodes, recurrence or disease‐free survival between the two groups. Conclusion RRH for CC is safe and feasible and may be an alternative treatment for CC. More multicentre randomized controlled trials investigating the long‐term oncological outcomes are required to determine the advantages of RRH over LRH in CC. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.