Comparison of robotic-assisted vs conventional laparoscopy for extraperitoneal paraaortic lymphadenectomy.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the perioperative outcomes of robotic-assisted extraperitoneal paraaortic lymphadenectomy for locally advanced cervical cancer and to compare to a previous series of patients from our institution undergoing the same procedure by conventional laparoscopy. METHODS: 17 patients with locally advanced cervical cancer (FIGO stages IB2, IIA2 and IIB-IVA) underwent pretherapeutic extraperitoneal paraaortic lymphadenectomy by robotic-assisted laparoscopy. Perioperative outcomes including age, BMI, FIGO stage, operating time, blood loss, complications and length of hospital stay were compared to a series of 83 patients from our institution undergoing the same procedure by conventional laparoscopy. RESULTS: The median values for operating time and hospital days for the robotic-assisted and conventional laparoscopy groups were 150 vs. 150 min and 2 vs 2 days, respectively. In the robotic group, blood loss was lower (90 vs 20 ml, p<0.05) and more aortic nodes were removed (14 vs 17 nodes, p<0.05). Docking time was 7 min (range 3-15). There were no intraoperative complications. There were no differences for postoperative complications (17.6% vs 8.4%). CONCLUSION: Robotic-assisted and conventional laparoscopy provide similar perioperative outcomes other than lower blood loss and higher number of aortic nodes removed (both without clinical impact) in robotic patients for the performance of extraperitoneal paraaortic lymphadenectomy in patients with locally advanced cervical cancer. We believe that robotic surgery is an additional tool to perform the same surgical procedure. HIGHLIGHTS: Robotic-assisted and conventional laparoscopic extraperitoneal paraaortic lymphadenectomy provide similar perioperative outcomes.

Location of aortic node metastases in locally advanced cervical cancer.

BACKGROUND: To assess the location of aortic node metastasis in patients with locally advanced cervical cancer undergoing extraperitoneal aortic lymphadenectomy to define the extent of the aortic lymphadenectomy. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Between August 2001 and December 2010, 100 consecutive patients with primary locally advanced cervical cancer underwent extraperitoneal laparoscopic aortic and common iliac lymphadenectomy. The location of aortic node metastases, inframesenteric or infrarenal was noted. RESULTS: The mean number±standard deviation (SD) of aortic nodes removed was 15.9 ± 7.8 (range 4-62). The mean number ± SD of inframesenteric (including common iliac) nodes removed was 8.8 ± 4.5 (range 2-41) and the mean number ± SD of infrarenal nodes removed was 7.8 ± 4.1 (range 2-21). Positive aortic nodes were observed in 16 patients, and in 5 (31.2%) of them the infrarenal nodes were the only nodes involved, with negative inframesenteric nodes. CONCLUSION: Inframesenteric aortic nodes are negative in the presence of positive infrarenal nodes in about one third of patients with locally advanced cervical cancer and aortic metastases.