ArticleInternational journal of gynecological cancer : official journal of the International Gynecological Cancer Society2017
Robotic-Assisted Radical Hysterectomy Results in Better Surgical Outcomes Compared With the Traditional Laparoscopic Radical Hysterectomy for the Treatment of Cervical Cancer.
Article in International journal of gynecological cancer : official journal of the International Gynecological Cancer Society, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
18 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 31 citations in OpenAlex.
- A comparison of perioperative outcomes for da Vinci robotic-assisted, laparoscopic and open surgery in oncologic procedures: a systematic literature review and meta-analysis of evidence from China.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Pooled it
- Comparison of survival outcomes between robotic and laparoscopic radical hysterectomies for early-stage cervical cancer: a systemic review and meta-analysis.Journal of gynecologic oncology · 2024Pooled it
- Robotic versus traditional laparoendoscopic single-site radical hysterectomy with no-manipulation technique: a retrospective cohort study.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- Clinical comparative study of robot-assisted and traditional laparoscopic surgery in patients with cervical cancer: a retrospective cohort study.BMC surgery · 2024Article
- Article
- Perioperative/postoperative anxiety and its interventions in gynecological cancers: a comprehensive review of clinical evidence.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2024Review
- Trends in surgical approach to hysterectomy and perioperative outcomes in Michigan hospitals from 2010 through 2020.Journal of robotic surgery · 2023Article
- Urological Complications in Radical Surgery for Cervical Cancer: A Comparative Meta-Analysis before and after LACC Trial.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Review
- Application of robotic surgery and traditional laparoscopic surgery in lymph node dissection for gynecological cancer: A meta‑analysis.Oncology letters · 2023Article
- New Insights on the Minimal-Invasive Therapy of Cervical Cancer.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Article
- Operating costs, fiscal impact, value analysis and guidance for the routine use of robotic technology in abdominal surgical procedures.Surgical endoscopy · 2022Article
- Robotic single-site versus multiport radical hysterectomy in early stage cervical cancer: An analysis of 62 cases from a single institution.The international journal of medical robotics + computer assisted surgery : MRCAS · 2021Article
- Surgical and Patient Outcomes of Robotic Versus Conventional Laparoscopic Hysterectomy: A Systematic Review.Cureus · 2021Review
- Feasibility of robotic radical hysterectomy (RRH) with a new robotic system. Experience at Galaxy Care Laparoscopy Institute.Journal of robotic surgery · 2021Article
- A retrospective assessment of the safety and efficacy of laparoscopic radical hysterectomy in Japan during the early years following its introduction: a Japanese Gynecologic Oncology Group study (JGOG1081S).International journal of clinical oncology · 2021Article
- Minimally invasive radical hysterectomy for early-stage cervical cancer: Volume-outcome relationship in the early experience period.Gynecologic oncology · 2020Article
- Minimally Invasive Radical Hysterectomy for Cervical Cancer: When Adoption of a Novel Treatment Precedes Prospective, Randomized Evidence.Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 2019Review
- Minimally invasive surgery for cervical cancer: consequences for treatment after LACC Study.Journal of gynecologic oncology · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe aim of this study was to compare the surgical outcomes of robotic-assisted radical hysterectomy (RRH) with traditional laparoscopic radical hysterectomy (TLRH) for the treatment of early-stage cervical cancer in a large retrospective cohort of a total of 933 patients.
methodsWe have enrolled 100 patients into the RRH and 833 patients into the TLRH group. The surgical outcomes include operating time, blood loss, transfusion rate, pelvic lymph node yield, hospitalization days, duration of bowel function recovery, catheter removal before and after 3 weeks, conversion to laparotomy, and intraoperative and postoperative complications. Follow-up results were also analyzed for all patients.
resultsBoth groups have similar patient and tumor characteristics but patients with a larger lesion size were preferably enrolled in the TLRH treatment group. The treatment with RRH was generally superior to TLRH with respect to operating time, blood loss, length of hospitalization, duration of bowel function recovery, and postoperative complications. On follow-up of patients, there were no relapses reported in the RRH group compared with 4% of relapse cases and 2.9% of deaths because of metastasis in the TLRH group. No conversion of laparotomy occurred in the RRH group. No significant difference was found with respect to intraoperative complications and blood transfusion between both groups.
conclusionsThe results from this study suggest that RRH is superior to TLRH with regard to surgical outcome and may pose a safe and feasible alternative to TLRH. The operating time and lymph node yield is acceptable. Our study is one of the largest single-center studies of surgical outcomes comparing RRH with TLRH during cervical cancer treatment and will significantly contribute to the safety of alternative treatment options for patients. Furthermore, the difference detected between TLRH and RRH group is further strengthened by the great expertise of the surgeon performing laparoscopic surgeries.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.