Robotic-Assisted Laparoscopic Hysterectomy versus Conventional Laparoscopic Hysterectomy for Endometrial Cancer at a Regional Institution: A Retrospective Study

Abstract

Background: Minimally invasive surgeries, such as laparoscopic and robotic surgeries, have been the main treatment methods for stage I endometrial cancer instead of laparotomy. However, minimally invasive surgeries for malignant tumors have not yet been established in many rural hospitals or hospitals with few gynecologists. This study aimed to investigate whether laparoscopic or robotic surgery for stage I endometrial cancer is more sustainable and useful at a rural hospital where a single non-laparoscopic-specialized surgeon performs oncologic surgery and provides outpatient care. Methods: This retrospective case-control study was conducted at our hospital. The study enrolled 65 patients with endometrial cancer who underwent robotic-assisted laparoscopic hysterectomy (RALH) or total laparoscopic hysterectomy (TLH). We compared surgical outcomes such as patient background, operation time, blood loss, and other indices. Results: Exactly 34 patients underwent robotic surgery, and 31 underwent laparoscopic surgery. No severe adverse events required reoperation, conversion to laparotomy, or ureteral injury during either operation. The operation time decreased in patients who underwent robotic surgery compared with those who underwent laparoscopic surgery (193 (140–227) vs. 253 (219–287) min, p < 0.001). In addition, the blood loss volume decreased by half in patients who underwent robotic surgery compared to those who underwent laparoscopic surgery. Significantly more operations were completed by two operators rather than three operators at robotic surgery compared to laparoscopic surgery (59% vs. 26%, p = 0.007). The hospitalization days were 1.5 days shorter in the robotic surgery group than in the laparoscopic surgery group (p < 0.001). Exactly 18 patients underwent robotic surgery with pelvic lymphadenectomy, and 26 underwent laparoscopic surgery with pelvic lymphadenectomy. Patients who underwent robotic surgery required less operation time than those who underwent laparoscopic surgery (226 (199–246) vs. 261 (236–287) min, p = 0.001). Conclusions: In the surgical treatment of stage I endometrial cancer, robotic surgery was associated with a significantly shorter operation time, shorter hospital stay, and no obvious complications. This study proposes that robotic surgery is a promising solution for the sustainable introduction of minimally invasive surgery for stage I endometrial cancer in rural hospitals or hospitals with few gynecologists.