Robotic technology for pelvic exenteration in cases of cervical cancer

Background

Cervical cancer represents one of the most common types of neoplasia among women; the use of minimally invasive techniques in the treatment of cervical cancer is a challenge.

Objectives

To present evidence regarding robotic technology in the performance of pelvic exenteration in cases of cervical cancer.

Search strategy

PubMed and Scopus databases were searched.

Selection criteria

Articles examining the use of robotic technology for pelvic exenteration in cases of cervical cancer were included.

Data collection and analysis

Four studies were included.

Main results

Most cancers treated with robotic-assisted pelvic exenteration were squamous cell carcinomas of the cervix. The stage of primary cancer ranged from IB2 to IVA. In 7 of the 8 patients, anterior pelvic exenteration was performed; the other patient underwent total pelvic exenteration. Procedure duration ranged from 375 to 600 minutes; blood loss was 200–550 mL. Postoperative complications occurred in 2 of the 8 patients and included perineal abscess, Miami pouch fistula, and ureteral stenosis. Postoperative hospital stay ranged from 3 to 53 days, and postoperative follow-up ranged from 2 to 31 months.

Conclusions

The gold standard for pelvic exenteration remains the open surgical approach; however, the application of robotic technology could be an alternate choice associated with excellent results.     

机器人辅助椎弓根螺钉置钉的准确性观察

目的 评估机器人辅助行椎弓根螺钉置钉的准确性并观察置钉并发症。方法 回顾性分析2014年12月—2015年5月苏州大学附属第一医院骨科行机器人辅助椎弓根螺钉置入的13例患者临床资料。其中男6例,女7例;年龄41~73岁,平均56.5岁;L₁爆裂性骨折2例,L₂压缩性骨折1例,L₄滑脱症4例,T₁₂爆裂性骨折伴截瘫1例,L₁陈旧性压缩性骨折伴后凸畸形1例,退行性侧弯1例,先天性脊柱侧弯术后翻修1例,腰椎间盘突出症伴椎管狭窄症1例,脊髓灰质炎后遗症性脊柱侧弯1例。采用Gertzbein和Robbins标准,CT定量分析椎弓根螺钉位置,并记录置钉所致并发症如神经根、血管、脊髓损伤等。结果 由机器人辅助置钉成功12例,其中83枚螺钉由机器人成功辅助置入,1枚螺钉因术中机器人无法注册改为徒手置钉;另1例患者因术中发现机器人置钉的进针点偏差大,改为徒手置钉。根据Gertzbein和Robbins标准,A级80枚,B级2枚,C级1枚,置钉准确率达98.8%(82/83)。无置钉所致并发症如神经根、脊髓损伤及血管损伤等。结论 机器人辅助椎弓根螺钉置钉精准性高,可减少或避免置钉所致并发症。     

The trifecta outcome in 300 consecutive cases of robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy according to D'Amico risk criteria

Background

To analyze the trifecta outcome (continence, potency, and cancer control) in 300 cases of robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (RARP).

Methods

A prospective assessment of outcomes in 300 consecutive patients that underwent a RARP performed by a single surgeon. Patients were grouped according to D'Amico risk criteria: Group I consisted of ‘low-risk’ cases (n = 64), Group II consisted of ‘intermediate-risk’ cases (n = 88), and Group III consisted of ‘high-risk’ cases (n = 148). Patients were evaluated for perioperative complications and the trifecta outcome.

Results

The operation time, blood loss, post-operative stay, duration of urethral catheterization, and perioperative complication rate were similar among all groups. The incidence of bilateral neurovascular bundle (NVB) preservation was significantly decreased with the increasing risk of cases (P < 0.001). The continence rates at the 1-week, 1-month, 3-month, 6-month, and 12-month follow-ups did not differ significantly between groups. The potency rates at the 12-month follow-up were not significantly different. The positive surgical margin and positive lymph node metastasis rate increased with the increasing risk of cases (P < 0.001). The biochemical recurrence rate (BCR, PSA >0.2 ng/mL) was 3.1, 11.36, and 19.59% in Groups I, II and III, respectively (P = 0.004). The trifecta outcome for RARP with bilateral NVB preservation showed no significant differences among groups.

Conclusions

Undergoing a RARP is safe and feasible in high-risk prostate cancer patients. Compared to low-risk and intermediate-risk groups, the high-risk group had a significant higher incidence of positive surgical margin, positive lymph node metastasis, and BCR rate.     

Robot-assisted laparoscopic nephron sparing surgery for tumors over 4 cm: Operative results and preliminary oncologic outcomes from a multicentre French study

Objective

To assess operative and pathological results obtained after robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN) in renal masses over 4 cm.

Patients and methods

Between 2007 and 2011, 220 robotic nephron-sparing surgeries (NSS) were performed at six French urology departments. Data were prospectively collected: age, BMI, pre and post-operative eGFR (MDRD), operative time (OT), warm ischemia time (WIT), estimated blood loss (EBL), length of hospital stay (LOS), Clavien complications, pathological results and oncologic outcome. Tumor complexity was assessed according to the RENAL nephrometry score.

Results

Overall, 54 tumors were included. Median follow up was 26 months. Median age at surgery was 62 years. Median RENAL nephrometry score was 7 (4–10). Median WIT was 23 min (10–59). Median OT and EBL were 180 min (110–425) and 100 cc (0–2500). Blood transfusion occurred in 7 cases (13%). Median tumor size was 45 mm (40–70). Three patients had positive surgical margins. Median LOS was 5 days (2–28). Nine patients presented post-operative complications of which 1/3 were considered as major (Clavien IIIb). Median pre-operative and post-operative eGFR was 88 (36–136) and 75 ml/min (33–122) (p = 0.01), respectively. Two patients developed subsequent metastasis. The 2-year progression free survival (PFS) rate was 90.5%.

Conclusion

Our results confirm that RAPN is a useful and acceptable approach for renal masses greater than 4 cm in size. When technically possible, NSS provides promising short-term cancer-specific survival rates with acceptable morbidity. Tumor size is not sufficiently discriminant enough and RENAL nephrometry score should increasingly used to describe tumor complexity.     

Venous Thromboembolic Events in Minimally Invasive Gynecologic Surgery

The rate of venous thromboembolic events (VTEs) including deep venous thrombosis and pulmonary embolism among women undergoing gynecologic surgery is high, particularly for women with a gynecologic malignancy. Current guidelines recommend VTE thrombopropylaxis in the immediate postoperative period for patients undergoing open surgery. However, the VTE prophylaxis recommendations for women undergoing minimally invasive gynecologic surgery are not as well established. The risk of VTEs in patients undergoing minimally invasive surgery appears to be low based on retrospective analyses. To date, there are no established guidelines that specifically provide a standard of care for patients undergoing minimally invasive gynecologic surgery for benign or malignant disease.     

机器人与透视下辅助经椎间孔椎体间融合术治疗腰椎间盘突出症的病例对照研究

目的:比较透视与机器人辅助下微创经椎间孔椎体间融合术(minimal invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion,MIS-TLIF)治疗单间隙腰椎间盘突出症的安全性与置钉准确性.方法:回顾性分析2019年3月至2020年2月采用MIS-TLIF手术方式治疗的52例单间...     

Robotic approach for ovarian cancer: perioperative and survival results and comparison with laparoscopy and laparotomy

Objective

Comparison of perioperative outcomes and survival of patients undergoing primary surgical treatment for epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) by a robotic, laparoscopy, or laparotomy approach.

Methods

Retrospective case-control analysis of 25 patients with EOC undergoing robotic surgical treatment between March 2004 and December 2008. Comparison was made with similar patients treated by laparoscopy and laparotomy and matched by age, body mass index (BMI), and type of procedures between January 1999 and December 2006.

Results

The mean operating times were 314.8, 253.8 and 260.7 min for robotic, laparoscopy and laparotomy patients, respectively (p < 0.05); the mean blood loss was 164.0, 266.7, and 1307.0 ml, respectively (p = 0.001); the mean length of hospital stay was 4.2, 3.2, and 9.4 days, respectively (p = 0.001). The overall survival (OS) for robotics, laparoscopy and laparotomy patients was 67.1%, 75.6% and 66.0%, respectively (p = 0.08). Patients were subdivided and compared according to the extent of surgery by the type and number of major procedures. Type I and II debulking patients operated by robotics and laparoscopy had improved perioperative outcomes as compared to laparotomy. For patients undergoing a type III debulking, robotic outcomes were not improved over laparotomy.

Conclusion

Laparoscopy and robotics are preferable to laparotomy for patients with ovarian cancer requiring primary tumor excision alone or with one additional major procedure. Laparotomy is preferable for patients requiring two or more additional major procedures. Survival is not affected by the type of surgical approach.