title: Robotic versus laparoscopic radical hysterectomy in cervical cancer patients: a matched-case comparative study.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  This study aimed to compare initial surgical outcomes and complication rates of patients with early-stage cervical cancer who underwent robotic radical hysterectomy (RRH) and conventional laparoscopic radical hysterectomy (LRH).
  
  
  METHODS
  Patients diagnosed with invasive cervical cancer (International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics stage I-IIA) who underwent RRH (n = 23) at Samsung Medical Center from January 2008 to May 2013 were compared with matched patients who underwent LRH (n = 69) during the same period. The 2 surgical groups were matched 3:1 for variables of age, body mass index, International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics stage, histological subtype, tumor size, and node positivity. All patient information and surgical and postoperative follow-up data were retrospectively collected.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Operating time was significantly longer (317 vs 236 minutes; P < 0.001) in the RRH group compared with the LRH group but mean estimated blood loss was significantly reduced in the RRH group (200 vs 350 mL; P = 0.036). Intraoperative and postoperative complications were not significantly different between the 2 groups (4.3% for RRH vs 1.45% for LRH; P = 0.439). Recurrences were 2 (8.7%) in the RRH and 7 (10.1%) in the LRH group. The overall 3-year recurrence-free survival was 91.3% in RRH group and 89.9% in the LRH group (P = 0.778).
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Although operating time was longer in the RRH cases because of lesser experience on robotic platform, we showed that surgical outcomes and complication rate of RRH were comparable to those of LRH. In addition, surgical skills for LRH easily and safely translated to RRH in case of experienced laparoscopic surgeon.
authors.affiliation: Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
authors.forename: Tae-Hyun
authors.initials: TH
authors.lastname: Kim
authors.forename: Chel Hun
authors.initials: CH
authors.lastname: Choi
authors.forename: June-Kuk
authors.initials: JK
authors.lastname: Choi
authors.forename: Aera
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: Yoon
authors.forename: Yoo-Young
authors.initials: YY
authors.lastname: Lee
authors.forename: Tae-Joong
authors.initials: TJ
authors.lastname: Kim
authors.forename: Jeong-Won
authors.initials: JW
authors.lastname: Lee
authors.forename: Duk-Soo
authors.initials: DS
authors.lastname: Bae
authors.forename: Byoung-Gie
authors.initials: BG
authors.lastname: Kim
mesh_terms: D000230:Adenocarcinoma / Q000453:epidemiology / Q000473:pathology / Q000601:surgery*; D000328:Adult; D000368:Aged; D002294:Carcinoma, Squamous Cell / Q000453:epidemiology / Q000473:pathology / Q000601:surgery*; D016022:Case-Control Studies; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D007044:Hysterectomy / Q000295:instrumentation / Q000379:methods*; D010535:Laparoscopy; D007902:Length of Stay / Q000706:statistics & numerical data; D008875:Middle Aged; D011183:Postoperative Complications / Q000453:epidemiology; D065287:Robotic Surgical Procedures; D002583:Uterine Cervical Neoplasms / Q000453:epidemiology / Q000473:pathology / Q000601:surgery*