Robotic salvage radical hysterectomy for locally recurrent cervical cancer: A comparison with open surgery in a single‐surgeon series

Abstract

AIM: To compare the surgical and oncologic outcomes between patients with locally recurrent cervical cancer undergoing robotic-assisted salvage radical hysterectomy (RH) and those undergoing conventional open salvage RH, performed by a single surgeon. METHODS: This retrospective comparative observational study utilized data obtained from consecutive patients with locally recurrent cervical cancer, developed after definitive radiotherapy. These patients either underwent robot-assisted RH (robotic group) or conventional open RH (open group). Clinicopathological characteristics, surgical outcomes, and oncological outcomes were compared between the two groups. RESULTS: The operative time was slightly longer in the robotic group; however, this difference was not statistically significant. Estimated blood loss was significantly lower in the robotic group (median; 0 mL [robotic group] vs. 700 mL [open group]: p < 0.01). The incidence of intraoperative and early and late complications did not statistically differ between the two groups. The mean follow-up was 29.0 and 17.1 months in the open and robotic groups, respectively. Disease recurrence rates were similar between the two groups (40% [robotic group] vs. 44.4% [open group]). Kaplan-Meier survival analysis for progression-free survival and overall survival did not show statistically significant differences between the two groups. CONCLUSION: Robot-assisted salvage RH in women with locally recurrent cervical cancer showed perioperative and oncological outcomes comparable to those of the open procedure. Although our results suggest that the robot-assisted approach is as good as or better than the open approach, further investigation is required to establish a more robust conclusion.