Robotic salvage radical hysterectomy for locally recurrent cervical cancer: A comparison with open surgery in a single-surgeon series

Aim

To compare the surgical and oncologic outcomes between patients with locally recurrent cervical cancer undergoing robotic-assisted salvage radical hysterectomy (RH) and those undergoing conventional open salvage RH, performed by a single surgeon.

Methods

This retrospective comparative observational study utilized data obtained from consecutive patients with locally recurrent cervical cancer, developed after definitive radiotherapy. These patients either underwent robot-assisted RH (robotic group) or conventional open RH (open group). Clinicopathological characteristics, surgical outcomes, and oncological outcomes were compared between the two groups.

Results

The operative time was slightly longer in the robotic group; however, this difference was not statistically significant. Estimated blood loss was significantly lower in the robotic group (median; 0 mL [robotic group] vs. 700 mL [open group]: p < 0.01). The incidence of intraoperative and early and late complications did not statistically differ between the two groups. The mean follow-up was 29.0 and 17.1 months in the open and robotic groups, respectively. Disease recurrence rates were similar between the two groups (40% [robotic group] vs. 44.4% [open group]). Kaplan–Meier survival analysis for progression-free survival and overall survival did not show statistically significant differences between the two groups.

Conclusion

Robot-assisted salvage RH in women with locally recurrent cervical cancer showed perioperative and oncological outcomes comparable to those of the open procedure. Although our results suggest that the robot-assisted approach is as good as or better than the open approach, further investigation is required to establish a more robust conclusion.