title: Minimally invasive comprehensive surgical staging for endometrial cancer: Robotics or laparoscopy?
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  To compare outcomes between robotic versus laparoscopic hysterectomy and lymphadenectomy in patients with endometrial cancer.
  
  
  METHODS
  A cohort study was performed by prospectively identifying all patients with clinical stage I or occult stage II endometrial cancer who underwent robotic hysterectomy and lymphadenectomy from 2006-2008 and retrospectively comparing data using the same surgeons' laparoscopic hysterectomy and lymphadenectomy cases from 1998-2005, prior to our robotic experience. Patient demographics, operative times, complications, conversion rates, pathologic results, and length of stay were analyzed.
  
  
  RESULTS
  181 patients (105 robotic and 76 laparoscopic) met inclusion criteria. There was no significant difference between the two groups in median age, uterine weight, bilateral pelvic or aortic lymph node counts, or complication rates in patients whose surgeries were completed minimally invasively. Despite a higher BMI (34 vs. 29, P<0.001), the estimated blood loss (100 vs. 250 mL, P<0.001), transfusion rate (3% vs. 18%, RR 0.18, 95%CI 0.05-0.64, P=0.002), laparotomy conversion rate (12% vs. 26%, RR 0.47, 95%CI 0.25-0.89, P=0.017), and length of stay (median: 1 vs. 2 nights, P<0.001) were lower in the robotic patients compared to the laparoscopic cohort. The odds ratio of conversion to laparotomy based on BMI for robotics compared to laparoscopy is 0.20 (95% CI 0.08-0.56, P=0.002). The mean skin to skin time (242 vs. 287 min, P<0.001) and total room time (305 vs. 336 min, P<0.001) was shorter for the robotic cohort.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Robotic hysterectomy and lymphadenectomy for endometrial carcinoma can be accomplished in heavier patients and results in shorter operating times and hospital length of stay, a lower transfusion rate, and less frequent conversion to laparotomy when compared to laparoscopic hysterectomy and lymphadenectomy.
authors.affiliation: The Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, The Ohio State University College of Medicine, Columbus, OH 43210-1228, USA.
authors.forename: Leigh G
authors.initials: LG
authors.lastname: Seamon
authors.forename: David E
authors.initials: DE
authors.lastname: Cohn
authors.forename: Melissa S
authors.initials: MS
authors.lastname: Henretta
authors.forename: Kenneth H
authors.initials: KH
authors.lastname: Kim
authors.forename: Matthew J
authors.initials: MJ
authors.lastname: Carlson
authors.forename: Gary S
authors.initials: GS
authors.lastname: Phillips
authors.forename: Jeffrey M
authors.initials: JM
authors.lastname: Fowler
mesh_terms: D015992:Body Mass Index; D015331:Cohort Studies; D016889:Endometrial Neoplasms / Q000473:pathology / Q000601:surgery*; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D007044:Hysterectomy / Q000379:methods; D010535:Laparoscopy / Q000379:methods*; D008197:Lymph Node Excision / Q000379:methods; D008875:Middle Aged; D009367:Neoplasm Staging; D011446:Prospective Studies; D012371:Robotics / Q000379:methods*