Evaluation of intra- and post-operative outcomes to compare robot-assisted surgery and conventional laparoscopy for gynecologic oncology.

OBJECTIVE: To compare robot-assisted surgery and conventional laparoscopy for gynecologic oncology regarding intra- and post-operative outcomes.

METHODS: A retrospective study was performed on consecutive patients with gynecologic oncology from February 2014 to October 2017 at Gansu Provincial Hospital, China. Multivariable linear and logistic regression models were performed to explore the difference between two surgeries in the surgical outcomes after adjusting for potential confounders.

RESULTS: 276 women were included in this study: 153 robot-assisted surgeries and 123 conventional laparoscopies. The multivariable linear regression model showed that robot-assisted surgery was longer operative time [coefficient (coef), 33.76; 95% CI, 12.47, 55.05; P = 0.002) ], higher lymph node yield (coef, 10.41; 95% CI, 7.47, 13.35; P < 0.001), shorter time to early post-operative feeding (coef, -1.09; 95% CI, -1.33, -0.84; P < 0.001) and less post-operative drainage volume (coef, -368.77; 95% CI, -542.46, -195.09; P < 0.001) than conventional laparoscopy. However, no difference was observed between the two surgeries regarding the estimated blood loss (P > 0.05). The multivariable logistic regression model showed that post-operative complications were similar between robot-assisted surgery and conventional laparoscopy (P > 0.05).

CONCLUSION: Robot-assisted surgery was superior to conventional laparoscopy regarding intra- and post-operative outcomes for gynecologic oncology.