Skip to main content

Robotic Surgery in Gynecologic Oncology

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Atlas of Single-Port, Laparoscopic, and Robotic Surgery
  • 1643 Accesses

Abstract

The application of robotic technology for abdominal and pelvic surgery has had a strong impact in gynecologic oncological surgery. The most influential result is a decrease in the number of procedures performed by laparotomy. Many centers have evolved from a laparotomy to a robotic approach, and centers that were performing advanced laparoscopic procedures have discovered the advantages of robotic technology for gynecologic oncological operations. When analyzing perioperative outcomes for laparotomy, laparoscopy, and robotic surgery, three major benefits appear in almost all studies: reduced blood loss, shorter hospitalization, and shorter recovery to normal activities. Operating times are similar or longer, and postoperative complications are similar or reduced, for laparoscopy and robotic surgery patients.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 99.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 129.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. American Cancer Society. Cancer facts & figures. 2013. http://www.cancer.org/research/cancerfactsfigures/cancerfactsfigures/cancer-facts-figures-2013. Accessed 16 Dec 2013.

  2. Walker JL, Piedmonte MR, Spirtos NM, Eisenkop SM, Schlaerth JB, Mannel RS, et al. Laparoscopy compared with laparotomy for comprehensive surgical staging of uterine cancer: Gynecologic Oncology Group Study LAP2. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27:5331–6.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Walker JL, Piedmonte MR, Spirtos NM, Eisenkop SM, Schlaerth JB, Mannel RS, et al. Recurrence and survival after random assignment to laparoscopy versus laparotomy for comprehensive surgical staging of uterine cancer: Gynecologic Oncology Group LAP2 Study. J Clin Oncol. 2012;30:695–700.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Magrina JF, Zanagnolo V, Giles D, Noble BN, Kho RM, Magtibay PM. Robotic surgery for endometrial cancer: comparison of perioperative outcomes and recurrence with laparoscopy, vaginal/laparoscopy and laparotomy. Eur J Gynaecol Oncol. 2011;32:476–80.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Bandera C, Magrina JF. Robotic surgery in gynecologic oncology. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol. 2009;21:25–30.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Boggess JF, Gehrig PA, Cantrell L, Shafer A, Ridgway M, Skinner EN, et al. A comparative study of 3 surgical methods for hysterectomy with staging for endometrial cancer: robotic assistance, laparoscopy, laparotomy. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2008;199:360.e1–9.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Magrina JF. Minimally invasive surgery in gynecologic oncology. Gynecol Oncol. 2009;114(2 Suppl):S22–3.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Kho R, Hilger W, Hentz J, Magtibay P, Magrina JF. Robotic hysterectomy: technique and initial outcomes. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2007;197:113.e1–4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Magrina JF, Kho R, Weaver A, Magtibay P. Robotic radical hysterectomy: comparison with laparoscopy and laparotomy. Gynecol Oncol. 2008;109:86–91.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Magrina JF. Robotic surgery in gynecology. Eur J Gynaecol Oncol. 2007;28:77–82.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Magrina JF, Kho R, Magtibay PM. Robotic radical hysterectomy: technical aspects. Gynecol Oncol. 2009;113:28–31.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Querleu D, Morrow C. Classification of radical hysterectomy. Lancet Oncol. 2008;9:297–303.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Gil-Moreno A, Magrina JF, Perez-Benavente A, Diaz-Feijoo B, Sanchez-Iglesias JL, Garcia A, et al. Location of aortic node metastases in locally advanced cervical cancer. Gynecol Oncol. 2012;125:312–4.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Magrina JF, Long JB, Kho RM, Giles DL, Montero RP, Magtibay PM. Robotic transperitoneal infrarenal aortic lymphadenectomy: technique and results. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2010;20:184–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Magrina JF, Kho R, Montero RP, Magtibay PM, Pawlina W. Robotic extraperitoneal aortic lymphadenectomy: development of a technique. Gynecol Oncol. 2008;113:32–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Magrina JF, Zanagnolo V, Noble BN, Kho RM, Magtibay PM. Robotic approach for ovarian cancer: preoperative and survival results and comparison with laparoscopy and laparotomy. Gynecol Oncol. 2011;121:100–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Javier F. Magrina MD .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2014 Springer Science+Business Media New York

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Magrina, J.F. (2014). Robotic Surgery in Gynecologic Oncology. In: Escobar, P., Falcone, T. (eds) Atlas of Single-Port, Laparoscopic, and Robotic Surgery. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-6840-0_19

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-6840-0_19

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, New York, NY

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-4614-6839-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-4614-6840-0

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics