Robotic Single-Site Hysterectomy in Gynecologic Benign Pathology: A Systematic Review of the Literature.

Background and objectives: Total hysterectomy is one of the most common gynecologic surgical procedures and it is mainly performed for benign pathologies. The introduction of robotic single-site surgery (RSS) as an acceptable alternative to laparoendoscopic surgery combines the advantages of robotics with the aesthetic result of a single incision. This study aims to review the existing literature on a single-site robotic hysterectomy in patients with benign pathologies and verify its safety and feasibility. Materials and Methods: Following the recommendations in the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) statement, FP and AR systematically screened the PubMed, Embase, and Scopus databases. No temporal or geographical limitation was discriminatory. Studies containing data about feasibility and safety were included. Results: From 219, only eight studies met the inclusion criteria, and a total of 212 patients were included with a mean patient age of 45.42 years old (range 28-49.5 years old) and a mean BMI of 25.74 kg/m2 (range 22-28.5 kg/m2). The mean presurgical time, including port placement and docking time, was 15.56 (range 3-30) minutes. Mean console time was reported in six studies and is 83.21 min (range 25-180 min). The mean operative time is 136.6 min (range 60-294 min) and the mean blood loss is 43.68 mL (range 15-300 mL). Only two patients in the total analyzed had intraoperative complications and no conversion to LPT occurred. The median hospital stay was 1.71 days (range 0.96-3.5 days). The postoperative complication rate was estimated at 1.4% (vaginal bleeding). Conclusions: Our review supports the safety and feasibility of robotic single-site hysterectomy for benign gynecological diseases.

Fertility-Sparing Treatment for Early-Stage Cervical Cancer ≥ 2 cm: A Problem with a Thousand Nuances-A Systematic Review of Oncological Outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Fertility-sparing treatments (FSTs) have played a crucial role in the management of early-stage cervical cancer (ECC). The guidelines have recognized various approaches, depending on the tumor stage and other risk factors such as histotype and lymphovascular positivity. Much more debate has centered around the boundary within which these treatments should be considered. Indeed, these are methods to be reserved for ECC, but tumor size may represent the most significant limitation. In particular, there is no consensus on the strategy to be adopted in the case of ECC ≥ 2 cm. Therefore, this systematic review was to collect the literature evidence regarding the management of these patients. METHODS: Following the recommendations in the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement, we systematically searched the Pubmed and Scopus databases was conducted in April 2022, from the date of the first publication. We made no limitation on the country. We included all studies containing data on disease-free survival, overall survival, recurrence rate (RR), or complete response rate (CRR) to chemotherapy. RESULTS: Twenty-six studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria, and 691 patients were analyzed regarding FST. Surgery-based FST showed an RR of between 0 and 42.9%, which drops to 12.9% after excluding the vaginal or minimally invasive approaches. Furthermore, papers regarding FST based on the neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) approach showed a CRR of between 21.4 and 84.5%, and an RR of between 0 and 22.2% CONCLUSION: This paper focused on the significant heterogeneity present in the clinical management of FST of ECC ≥ 2 cm. Nevertheless, from an oncological point of view, approaches limited to the minimally invasive or vaginal techniques showed the highest RR. Vice versa, the lack of standardization of NACT schemes and the wealth of confounders to be attributed to the histological features of the tumor make it difficult, if not impossible, to set a standard of treatment.

Laparo-assisted vaginal radical hysterectomy as a safe option for minimal invasive surgery in early stage cervical cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Radical hysterectomy and pelvic lymphadenectomy are considered the standard treatment for early-stage cervical cancer (ECC). Minimal Invasive approach to this surgery has been debated after the publication of a recent prospective randomized trial (Laparoscopic Approach to Cervical Cancer, LACC trial). It demonstrated poorer oncological outcomes for Minimal Invasive Surgery in ECC. However, the reasons are still an open debate. Laparo-Assisted Vaginal Hysterectomy (LAVRH) seems to be a logical option to Abdominal Radical Hysterectomy (ARH). This meta-analysis has the aim to prove it. METHODS: Following the recommendations in the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement, the Pubmed database and Scopus database were systematically searched in January 2022 since early first publications. No limitation of the country was made. Only English article were considered. The studies containing data about Disease-free Survival (DFS) and/or Overall Survival (OS) and/or Recurrence Rate (RcR) were included. RESULTS: 18 studies fulfilled inclusion criteria. 8 comparative studies were enrolled in meta-analysis. Patients were analyzed concerning surgical approach (Laparo-Assisted Vaginal Radical Hysterectomy) and compared with ARH Oncological outcomes such as DFS and OS were considered. 3033 patiets were included. Meta-analysis highlighted a non-statistic significant difference between LARVH and ARH (RR 0.82 [95% CI 0.55-1.23] p = 0.34; I2 = 0%; p = 0.96). OS was feasible only for 3 studies (RR 1.14 [95% CI 0.28-4.67] p = 0.43; I2 = 0 p = 0.86). Data about the type of recurrences (loco-regional vs distant) were collected. CONCLUSION: LARVH does not appear to affect DFS and OS in ECC patients. The proposed results seem to be comparable with the open approach group of the LACC trial, which today represents the reference standard for the treatment of this pathology. More studies will be needed to test the safety and efficacy of LARVH in the ECC.

Laparo-assisted vaginal radical hysterectomy as a safe option for Minimal Invasive Surgery in early stage cervical cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Radical hysterectomy and pelvic lymphadenectomy are considered the standard treatment for early-stage cervical cancer (ECC). Minimal Invasive approach to this surgery has been debated after the publication of a recent prospective randomized trial (Laparoscopic Approach to Cervical Cancer, LACC trial). It demonstrated poorer oncological outcomes for Minimal Invasive Surgery in ECC. However, the reasons are still an open debate. Laparo-Assisted Vaginal Hysterectomy (LAVRH) seems to be a logical option to Abdominal Radical Hysterectomy (ARH). This meta-analysis has the aim to prove it. METHODS: Following the recommendations in the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement, the Pubmed database and Scopus database were systematically searched in January 2022 since early first publications. No limitation of the country was made. Only English article were considered. The studies containing data about Disease-free Survival (DFS) and/or Overall Survival (OS) and/or Recurrence Rate (RcR) were included. RESULTS: 19 studies fulfilled inclusion criteria. 9 comparative studies were enrolled in meta-analysis. Patients were analyzed concerning surgical approach (Laparo-Assisted Vaginal Radical Hysterectomy) and compared with ARH Oncological outcomes such as DFS and OS were considered. 3196 patiets were included for the review. Meta-analysis of 1988 0f them highlighted a non-statistic significant difference between LARVH and ARH (RR 0.8 [95% CI 0.55-1.16] p = 0.24; I2 = 0%; p = 0.98). OS was feasible only for 4 studies (RR 0.84 [95% CI 0.23-3.02] p = 0.79; I2 = 0 p = 0.44). Sub-analysis for tumor with a maximum diameter greater than 2 cm was performed. Data about the type of recurrences (loco-regional vs distant) were collected. CONCLUSION: LARVH does not appear to affect DFS and OS in ECC patients. The proposed results seem to be comparable with the open approach group of the LACC trial, which today represents the reference standard for the treatment of this pathology. More studies will be needed to test the safety and efficacy of LARVH in the ECC.

Impact of anxiety levels on the perception of pain in patients undergoing office hysteroscopy.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed at assessing the impact of anxiety on pain perception during hysteroscopy and to highlight the possible contribution of factors related to pain perception. MATERIALS AND METHODS: 104 women with indication for office hysteroscopy fullfilled anonymous self-report questionnaires during the waiting time, before the procedure. The first self-report questionnaire included general patient information and an overall assessment of the degree of satisfaction with the information received before the procedure. The level of pre-procedural anxiety was measured through the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory STAI-Y1 (state anxiety). The perceived stress was assessed using the Perceived Stress Scale (PSS). The intensity of pain during the procedure and 20 min later was assessed with VAS score. RESULTS: The average waiting time was of 192.33 ± 91 min. 59 patients (56.7%) performed the examination without analgesia while 45 women (43.3%) required analgesia. 28 women (27%) experienced mild pain, 34 (33%) moderate pain and 42 (40%) severe pain. The patients who performed the procedure without analgosedation had an average STAI-Y1 score of 44.81 ± 1.20, compared to women who required analgosedation (average score of 49.40 ± 1.64). The perceived level of stress was also associated with the use of analgosedation. Patients who did not request any anesthetic intervention obtained a PSS average score of 16.66 ± 0.75, compared to the subgroup with anesthesia (score of 19.76 ± 0.90). CONCLUSIONS: Anxiety represents a key element for the success of ambulatory hysteroscopy. The management of anxiety can reduce the request for analgesia with a consequent optimization of time, costs and safety.

Locally Advanced Cervical Cancer: Neoadjuvant Treatment versus Standard Radio-Chemotherapy-An Updated Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: The treatment of choice for patients with locally advanced cervical cancer (LACC) is definitive concurrent radio chemotherapy which consists of external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) and concurrent platinum-based chemotherapy (CCRT), with the possible addition of brachytherapy (BT). However, the benefits of adjuvant surgery after neoadjuvant treatments remain a debated issue and a still open question in the literature. This meta-analysis aims to provide an updated view on the controversial topic, focusing on comparing surgery after any adjuvant treatment and standard treatment. METHODS: Following the recommendations in the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) statement, the PubMed and Embase databases were systematically searched in April 2023 for early publications. No limitations on the country were applied. Only English articles were considered. The comparative studies containing data about disease-free survival (DFS) and/or overall survival (OS) were included in the meta-analysis. RESULTS: The CCRT + surgery group showed a significantly better DFS than CCRT (RR 0.69 [95% CI 0.58-0.81] p < 0.01) and a better OS (RR 0.70 [95% CI 0.55-0.89] p < 0.01). Nine studies comparing neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) plus surgery and CCRT were also enrolled. The NACT + surgery group showed a significantly better DFS than CCRT (RR 0.66 [95% CI 0.45-0.97] p < 0.01) and a better OS (RR 0.56 [95% CI 0.38-0.83] p < 0.01). In the sub-analysis of three randomized control trials, the surgery group documented a non-significantly better DFS and OS than CCRT (OR 1.10 [95% CI 0.67-1.80] p = 0.72; I2 = 69% p = 0.72; OR 1.09 [95% CI 0.63-1.91] p = 0.75; I2 = 13% p = 0.32). CONCLUSION: The results provide updated findings about the efficacy of neoadjuvant treatments, indicating significantly improved DFS and OS in patients undergoing hysterectomy after CCRT or NACT compared with patients undergoing standard treatments.

Oncological outcomes in fertility-sparing treatment in stage IA-G2 endometrial cancer.

Background: The gold standard treatment for early-stage endometrial cancer (EC) is hysterectomy with bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy (BSO) with lymphadenectomy. In selected patients desiring pregnancy, fertility-sparing treatment (FST) can be adopted. Our review aims to collect the most incisive studies about the possibility of conservative management for patients with grade 2, stage IA EC. Different approaches can be considered beyond demolition surgery, such as local treatment with levonorgestrel-releasing intra-uterine device (LNG-IUD) plus systemic therapy with progestins. Study design: Our systematic review was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement. PubMed, EMBASE, and Scopus databases were consulted, and five studies were chosen based on the following criteria: patients with a histological diagnosis of EC stage IA G2 in reproductive age desiring pregnancy and at least one oncological outcome evaluated. Search imputes were "endometrial cancer" AND "fertility sparing" AND "oncologic outcomes" AND "G2 or stage IA". Results: A total of 103 patients were included and treated with a combination of LNG-IUD plus megestrol acetate (MA) or medroxyprogesterone acetate (MPA), gonadotrophin-releasing hormone (GnRH) plus MPA/MA, hysteroscopic resectoscope (HR), and dilation and curettage (D&C). There is evidence of 70% to 85% complete response after second-round therapy prolongation to 12 months. Conclusions: Conservative measures must be considered temporary to allow pregnancy and subsequently perform specific counseling to adopt surgery. Fertility-sparing management is not the current standard of care for young women with EC. It can be employed for patients with early-stage diseases motivated to maintain reproductive function. Indeed, the results are encouraging, but the sample size must be increased.