Survival outcomes for robotic-assisted laparoscopy versus traditional laparoscopy in clinical stage I epithelial ovarian cancer - 28/04/20
Abstract |
Background |
The US Food and Drug Administration recently called for studies addressing long-term survival after robotic-assisted laparoscopy in oncologic settings. Long-term clinical outcomes of robotic-assisted laparoscopy among ovarian cancer patients are understudied.
Objective(s) |
To investigate the long-term mortality of robotic-assisted laparoscopy compared to traditional laparoscopy for clinical stage I epithelial ovarian cancer.
Materials and Methods |
Using data from the National Cancer Database, we identified a total of 1901 patients who received minimally invasive surgery (ie, robotic-assisted laparoscopy or traditional laparoscopy) for clinical stage I epithelial ovarian cancer between 2010 and 2014. Multivariable logistic or linear regression analyses were conducted to evaluate the short-term outcomes, including conversion-to-open surgery, number of lymph nodes examined, length of hospitalization, unplanned 30-day readmission, and 30- and 90-day mortality. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards models were used to derive adjusted hazard ratios and 95% confidence intervals for 1-, 3-, and 5-year total mortality associated with surgical approaches. Covariates adjusted for included age, tumor size and upstaging, number of lymph nodes evaluated, time from diagnosis to surgery, length of hospitalization, histologic subtype, insurance status, region, distance to care, surgical procedure type, and hospital experience with these procedures.
Results |
Compared to traditional laparoscopy, robotic-assisted laparoscopy was less likely to result in conversion-to-open surgery (conversion rate: 7.2% versus 17.9%, P < .001; adjusted odds ratio, 0.49; 95% confidence interval, 0.33–0.73). In multivariable analyses, there were no significant differences in survival between robotic-assisted laparoscopy– and traditional laparoscopy–treated patients. Compared with traditional laparoscopy, the adjusted hazard ratios for 1-, 3-, and 5-year mortality were 0.97 (95% confidence interval, 0.43–2.18), 0.68 (95% confidence interval, 0.43–1.08), and 0.78 (95% confidence interval, 0.53–1.16), respectively.
Conclusion(s) |
Robotic-assisted laparoscopy had comparable overall mortality in comparison to traditional laparoscopy when treating clinical stage I epithelial ovarian cancer.
Le texte complet de cet article est disponible en PDF.Key words : FDA, gynecologic oncology, minimally invasive surgery, NCDB, surgical oncology
Plan
| The authors report no conflict of interest. |
|
| No funding sources were involved in this study. |
|
| B.F. and F.W. contributed equally to this project. |
|
| Cite this article as: Facer B, Wang F, Grijalva CG, et al. Survival outcomes for robotic-assisted laparoscopy versus traditional laparoscopy in clinical stage I epithelial ovarian cancer. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2020;222:474.e1-12. |
Vol 222 - N° 5
P. 474.e1-474.e12 - mai 2020 Retour au numéro
Article précédent
- Associations between the vaginal microbiome and Candida colonization in women of reproductive age
- Brett A. Tortelli, Warren G. Lewis, Jenifer E. Allsworth, Nadum Member-Meneh, Lynne R. Foster, Hilary E. Reno, Jeffrey F. Peipert, Justin C. Fay, Amanda L. Lewis
- Analgesic use at ovulation and implantation and human fertility
- Anne Marie Z. Jukic, Ponnu Padiyara, Michael B. Bracken, D. Robert McConnaughey, Anne Z. Steiner
Bienvenue sur EM-consulte, la référence des professionnels de santé.
L’accès au texte intégral de cet article nécessite un abonnement.
Déjà abonné à cette revue ?