RESUMEN
(1) The surgical method of choice for the treatment of endometrial cancer is minimally invasive surgery. In cases of high-risk endometrial cancer, completed paraaortic and pelvic lymphadenectomy are indicated. The aim of this study was to analyze the types of docking during robotic surgery assisted with the da Vinci X system while performing paraaortic and pelvic lymphadenectomy. (2) Methods: A total of 25 patients with high-risk endometrial cancer, with a mean age of 60.07 ± 10.67 (range 34.69-83.23) years, and with a mean body mass index (BMI) of 28.4 ± 5.62 (range 18-41.5) kg/m2, were included in this study. The analyzed population was divided into groups that underwent single or dual docking during surgery. (3) Results: No statistical significance was observed between single and dual docking during paraaortic and pelvic lymphadenectomy and between the type of docking and the duration of the operation. However, there was a statistically significant correlation between the duration of the operation and previous surgery (p < 0.005). The number of removed lymph nodes was statistically associated with BMI (p < 0.005): 15.87 ± 6.83 and 24.5 ± 8.7 for paraaortic and pelvic lymph nodes, respectively, in cases of single docking, and 18.05 ± 7.92 and 24.88 ± 11.75 for paraaortic and pelvic lymph nodes, respectively, in cases of dual docking. (4) Conclusions: The robot-assisted approach is a good surgical method for lymphadenectomy for obese patients, and, despite the type of docking, there are no differences in the quality of surgery.
RESUMEN
In Poland, robotic surgery is nowadays perceived as a new method of surgical treatment in endometrial cancer patients. We aim to present the first Polish group of endometrial cancer patients treated using robotic surgery. The analysis was based on 79 patients with mean age of 59.72 ± 11.709 (range 27-83) years and endometrial cancer scheduled for surgical treatment. Mean BMI was 31.38 ± 8.78 (range 19.03-65.97) kg/m2. The data were collected based on a questionnaire consisting of 19 questions concerning the patient's perception of robotic surgery before the procedure. Patients with a family history of neoplastic diseases indicate precision of movements as the most important reason for choosing robotic surgery (p = 0.0035). Patients after surgery procedures in the past named shorter hospitalization as a major benefit (p = 0.0037). Patients who chose robotic surgery for financial reasons stressed the cosmetic effect as a priority (p = 0.0319). Shorter length of hospital stay, less blood loss, enlarged view, and good visualization were statistically significant reasons for choosing robotic surgery (p < 0.05). Women who consider work, good material status, and well-being as the most important aspects of their lives cited the cosmetic effect as a benefit of robotic surgery (p = 0.0029 vs. p = 0.0074 vs. p = 0.01745, respectively). In the follow-up after operations, no patients regretted choosing robotic surgery. Good visualization, precise movements, less blood loss, and cosmetic effects are the most frequent reasons for choosing robotic surgery. Even patients after other types of surgery in the past decided on robot-assisted radical hysterectomy because of the clear benefits of this approach.
