首页|Tampere University Hospital Reports Findings in Endometrial Cancer (Robotic-assi sted versus conventional laparoscopic surgery for endometrial cancer: Long-term results of a randomized controlled trial)
Tampere University Hospital Reports Findings in Endometrial Cancer (Robotic-assi sted versus conventional laparoscopic surgery for endometrial cancer: Long-term results of a randomized controlled trial)
扫码查看
点击上方二维码区域，可以放大扫码查看
原文链接
NETL
NSTL
By a News Reporter-Staff News Editor at Robotics & Machine Learning Daily News Daily News – New research on Oncology - Endometrial Cancer is the subject of a report. According to news reporting out of Tampere, Finland, by NewsRx editors, research stated, “Robotic-assisted laparoscopic surg ery (RALS) has become a widely and increasingly used modality of minimally invas ive surgery in the treatment of endometrial cancer (EC). Due to its technical ad vantages, RALS offers benefits, such as a lower rate of conversions compared to conventional laparoscopy (CLS).” Our news journalists obtained a quote from the research from Tampere University Hospital, “Yet, data on long-term oncological outcomes after RALS is scarce and based on retrospective cohort studies only. This study aimed to assess overall s urvival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and long-term surgical complicati ons in EC patients randomly assigned to RALS or CLS. This randomized controlled trial was conducted at the Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics of Tampere Un iversity Hospital, Finland. Between 2010 and 2013, 101 patients with low-grade E C scheduled for minimally invasive surgery were randomized preoperatively 1:1 ei ther to RALS or CLS. All patients underwent laparoscopic hysterectomy, bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy, and pelvic lymphadenectomy. A total of 97 patients (49 i n the RALS group and 48 in the CLS group) were followed up for a minimum of 10 y ears. Survival was analyzed using Kaplan-Meier curves, log-rank test, and Cox pr oportional hazard models. Binary logistic regression analysis was used to analyz e risk factors for trocar site hernia. In the multivariable regression analysis, OS was favorable in the RALS group (HR 0.39; 95% CI, 0.15-0.99, p =.047) compared to the CLS group. There was no difference in PFS (log-rank test, p=.598). The three-, 5- and 10-year OS were 98.0% (95% CI, 94.0-100) vs. 97.9% (93.8-100), 91.8% (84.2-99.4 ) vs. 93.7% (86.8-100), and 75.5% (64.5-87.5) vs. 85 .4% (75.4-95.4) in the CLS and the RALS group, respectively. Troca r site hernia developed more often in the RALS group compared to the CLS group 1 8.2% vs. 4.1% (OR 5.42, 95% CI, 1.11-2 6.59, p=.028). The incidence of lymphocele, lymphedema, or other long-term compl ications did not differ between the groups. The results of this RCT suggest a mi nor OS benefit in EC after RALS compared to CLS. Hence, the use of RALS in the t reatment of EC seems safe, but larger RCTs are needed to confirm the potential s urvival benefit of RALS.”
TampereFinlandEuropeCancerClinic al ResearchClinical Trials and StudiesEmerging TechnologiesEndometrial Can cerGastroenterologyGynecologyHealth and MedicineHerniasMachine Learnin gOncologyRisk and PreventionRoboticsRobotsSurgeryWomen’s Health
NETL
NSTL
