Robotic vs laparoscopic radical hysterectomy for cervical cancer: a meta‐analysis

Abstract

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.