Springer Nature is making SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 research free. View research | View latest news | Sign up for updates

Robot-assisted surgery versus conventional laparoscopic surgery for endometrial cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

  • 792 Accesses

  • 9 Citations



To compare perioperative outcomes between robot-assisted surgery (RAS) and conventional laparoscopic surgery (CLS) for the treatment of endometrial cancer by conducting a meta-analysis.


We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, PubMed, and EMBASE up to January 8, 2016. Studies clearly documenting a comparison between RAS and CLS for patients with endometrial cancer were included. The perioperative outcomes of interest included intraoperative visceral injuries, postoperative complications, operation time, estimated blood loss (EBL), blood transfusion, total lymph nodes harvested (TLNH), conversion to laparotomy, and length of hospital stay. The weighted mean difference (WMD) and odds ratio (OR) were pooled with either a fixed-effects or a random-effects model.


A total of 19 studies were included in the analysis, involving 3056 patients. The pooled analysis showed that RAS was associated with lower EBL (WMD −77.65; 95 % confidence interval [CI] −105.58 to −49.72), lower conversion rate (OR 0.29; 95 % CI 0.18–0.46), and shorter hospital stay (WMD −0.48; 95 % CI −0.70 to −0.26) compared to CLS. The incidence of intraoperative visceral injuries, operation time, transfusion rate, and TLNH showed no significant differences between RAS and CLS.


RAS is a feasible and effective surgical approach that may be superior to CLS for the treatment of endometrial cancer, with lower EBL and lower conversion rate. Further prospective randomized trials are required to validate our findings.

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

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9


  1. Bell MC, Torgerson J, Seshadri-Kreaden U, Suttle AW, Hunt S (2008) Comparison of outcomes and cost for endometrial cancer staging via traditional laparotomy, standard laparoscopy and robotic techniques. Gynecol Oncol 111(3):407–411. doi:10.1016/j.ygyno.2008.08.022

  2. Boggess JF, Gehrig PA, Cantrell L, Shafer A, Ridgway M, Skinner EN et al (2008) A comparative study of 3 surgical methods for hysterectomy with staging for endometrial cancer: robotic assistance, laparoscopy, laparotomy. Am J Obstet Gynecol 199(4):360.e1-9. doi:10.1016/j.ajog.2008.08.012

  3. Cardenas-Goicoechea J, Adams S, Bhat SB, Randall TC (2010) Surgical outcomes of robotic-assisted surgical staging for endometrial cancer are equivalent to traditional laparoscopic staging at a minimally invasive surgical center. Gynecol Oncol 117(2):224–228. doi:10.1016/j.ygyno.2010.01.009

  4. Cardenas-Goicoechea J, Soto E, Chuang L, Gretz H, Randall TC (2013) Integration of robotics into two established programs of minimally invasive surgery for endometrial cancer appears to decrease surgical complications. J Gynecol Oncol 24(1):21–28. doi:10.3802/jgo.2013.24.1.21

  5. Cardenas-Goicoechea J, Shepherd A, Momeni M, Mandeli J, Chuang L, Gretz H et al (2014) Survival analysis of robotic versus traditional laparoscopic surgical staging for endometrial cancer. Am J Obstet Gynecol 210(2):160.e1–160.e11. doi:10.1016/j.ajog.2013.10.871

  6. Childers JM, Surwit EA (1992) Combined laparoscopic and vaginal surgery for the management of two cases of stage I endometrial cancer. Gynecol Oncol 45(1):46–51

  7. Chiou HY, Chiu LH, Chen CH, Yen YK, Chang CW, Liu WM (2015) Comparing robotic surgery with laparoscopy and laparotomy for endometrial cancer management: a cohort study. Int J Surg 13:17–22. doi:10.1016/j.ijsu.2014.11.015

  8. Coronado PJ, Herraiz MA, Magrina JF, Fasero M, Vidart JA (2012) Comparison of perioperative outcomes and cost of robotic-assisted laparoscopy, laparoscopy and laparotomy for endometrial cancer. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 165(2):289–294. doi:10.1016/j.ejogrb.2012.07.006

  9. Corrado G, Cutillo G, Pomati G, Mancini E, Sperduti I, Patrizi L et al (2015) Surgical and oncological outcome of robotic surgery compared to laparoscopic and abdominal surgery in the management of endometrial cancer. Eur J Surg Oncol 41(8):1074–1081. doi:10.1016/j.ejso.2015.04.020

  10. Desille-Gbaguidi H, Hebert T, Paternotte-Villemagne J, Gaborit C, Rush E, Body G (2013) Overall care cost comparison between robotic and laparoscopic surgery for endometrial and cervical cancer. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 171(2):348–352. doi:10.1016/j.ejogrb.2013.09.025

  11. Escobar PF, Frumovitz M, Soliman PT, Frasure HE, Fader AN, Schmeler KM et al (2012) Comparison of single-port laparoscopy, standard laparoscopy, and robotic surgery in patients with endometrial cancer. Ann Surg Oncol 19(5):1583–1588. doi:10.1245/s10434-011-2136-y

  12. Gehrig PA, Cantrell LA, Shafer A, Abaid LN, Mendivil A, Boggess JF (2008) What is the optimal minimally invasive surgical procedure for endometrial cancer staging in the obese and morbidly obese woman? Gynecol Oncol 111(1):41–45. doi:10.1016/j.ygyno.2008.06.030

  13. Higgins JP, Altman DG, Gøtzsche PC, Jüni P, Moher D, Oxman AD et al (2011) The Cochrane collaboration’s tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials. BMJ 343:d5928. doi:10.1136/bmj.d5928

  14. Hoekstra AV, Jairam-Thodla A, Rademaker A, Singh DK, Buttin BM, Lurain JR et al (2009) The impact of robotics on practice management of endometrial cancer: transitioning from traditional surgery. Int J Med Robot 5(4):392–397. doi:10.1002/rcs.268

  15. Hozo SP, Djulbegovic B, Hozo I (2005) Estimating the mean and variance from the median, range, and the size of a sample. BMC Med Res Methodol 5:13

  16. Humphrey MM, Apte SM (2009) The use of minimally invasive surgery for endometrial cancer. Cancer Control 16(1):30–37

  17. Johnson N, Barlow D, Lethaby A, Tavender E, Curr L, Garry R (2005) Methods of hysterectomy: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. BMJ 330(7506):1478

  18. Jung YW, Lee DW, Kim SW, Nam EJ, Kim JH, Kim JW et al (2010) Robot-assisted staging using three robotic arms for endometrial cancer: comparison to laparoscopy and laparotomy at a single institution. J Surg Oncol 101(2):116–121. doi:10.1002/jso.21436

  19. Lim PC, Kang E, do Park H (2010) Learning curve and surgical outcome for robotic-assisted hysterectomy with lymphadenectomy: case-matched controlled comparison with laparoscopy and laparotomy for treatment of endometrial cancer. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 17(6):739–748. doi:10.1016/j.jmig.2010.07.008

  20. Lim PC, Kang E, do Park H (2011) A comparative detail analysis of the learning curve and surgical outcome for robotic hysterectomy with lymphadenectomy versus laparoscopic hysterectomy with lymphadenectomy in treatment of endometrial cancer: a case-matched controlled study of the first one hundred twenty two patients. Gynecol Oncol 120(3):413–418. doi:10.1016/j.ygyno.2010.11.034

  21. Lin PS, Wakabayashi MT, Han ES (2009) Role of robotic surgery in endometrial cancer. Curr Treat Options Oncol 10(1–2):33–43. doi:10.1007/s11864-009-0086-4

  22. Magrina JF, Kho RM, Weaver AL, Montero RP, Magtibay PM (2008) Robotic radical hysterectomy: comparison with laparoscopy and laparotomy. Gynecol Oncol 109(1):86–91. doi:10.1016/j.ygyno.2008.01.011

  23. Magrina JF, Zanagnolo V, Giles D, Noble BN, Kho RM, Magtibay PM (2011) Robotic surgery for endometrial cancer: comparison of perioperative outcomes and recurrence with laparoscopy, vaginal/laparoscopy and laparotomy. Eur J Gynaecol Oncol 32(5):476–480

  24. Manchana T, Puangsricharoen P, Sirisabya N, Worasethsin P, Vasuratna A, Termrungruanglert W et al (2015) Comparison of Perioperative and Oncologic Outcomes with Laparotomy, and Laparoscopic or Robotic Surgery for Women with Endometrial Cancer. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev 16(13):5483–5488

  25. Martino MA, Shubella J, Thomas MB, Morcrette RM, Schindler J, Williams S et al (2011) A cost analysis of postoperative management in endometrial cancer patients treated by robotics versus laparoscopic approach. Gynecol Oncol 123(3):528–531. doi:10.1016/j.ygyno.2011.08.021

  26. Mendivil AA, Rettenmaier MA, Abaid LN, Brown JV 3rd, Micha JP, Lopez KL et al (2015) A comparison of open surgery, robotic-assisted surgery and conventional laparoscopic surgery in the treatment of morbidly obese endometrial cancer patients. JSLS 19(1):e2014.00001. doi:10.4293/JSLS.2014.00001

  27. Naumann RW, Coleman RL (2007) The use of adjuvant radiation therapy in early endometrial cancer by members of the Society of Gynecologic Oncologists in 2005. Gynecol Oncol 105(1):7–12

  28. Oehler MK (2015) Robotics versus conventional laparoscopy for endometrial cancer: Where are we now? Maturitas 81(2):241–242. doi:10.1016/j.maturitas.2015.03.019

  29. Rabinovich A (2015) Minimally invasive surgery for endometrial cancer. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol 27(4):302–307. doi:10.1097/GCO.0000000000000187

  30. Ran L, Jin J, Xu Y, Bu Y, Song F (2014) Comparison of robotic surgery with laparoscopy and laparotomy for treatment of endometrial cancer: a meta-analysis. PLoS ONE 9(9):e108361. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0108361

  31. Seamon LG, Cohn DE, Henretta MS, Kim KH, Carlson MJ, Phillips GS et al (2009) Minimally invasive comprehensive surgical staging for endometrial cancer: Robotics or laparoscopy? Gynecol Oncol 113(1):36–41. doi:10.1016/j.ygyno.2008.12.005

  32. Seror J, Bats AS, Huchon C, Bensaïd C, Douay-Hauser N, Lécuru F (2014) Laparoscopy vs robotics in surgical management of endometrial cancer: comparison of intraoperative and postoperative complications. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 21(1):120–125. doi:10.1016/j.jmig.2013.07.015

  33. Shafer A, Boggess JF (2008) Robotic-assisted endometrial cancer staging and radical hysterectomy with the da Vinci surgical system. Gynecol Oncol 111(2 Suppl):S18–S23. doi:10.1016/j.ygyno.2008.07.023

  34. Shah NT, Wright KN, Jonsdottir GM, Jorgensen S, Einarsson JI, Muto MG (2011) The feasibility of societal cost equivalence between robotic hysterectomy and alternate hysterectomy methods for endometrial cancer. Obstet Gynecol Int 2011:570464. doi:10.1155/2011/570464

  35. Shazly SA, Murad MH, Dowdy SC, Gostout BS, Famuyide AO (2015) Robotic radical hysterectomy in early stage cervical cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Gynecol Oncol 138(2):457–4571. doi:10.1016/j.ygyno.2015.06.009

  36. Subramaniam A, Kim KH, Bryant SA, Zhang B, Sikes C, Kimball KJ et al (2011) A cohort study evaluating robotic versus laparotomy surgical outcomes of obese women with endometrial carcinoma. Gynecol Oncol 122(3):604–607. doi:10.1016/j.ygyno.2011.05.024

  37. Tang KY, Gardiner SK, Gould C, Osmundsen B, Collins M, Winter WE 3rd (2012) Robotic surgical staging for obese patients with endometrial cancer. Am J Obstet Gynecol 206(6):513.e1-6. doi:10.1016/j.ajog.2012.01.002

  38. Turunen H, Pakarinen P, Sjöberg J, Loukovaara M (2013) Laparoscopic vs robotic-assisted surgery for endometrial carcinoma in a centre with long laparoscopic experience. J Obstet Gynaecol 33(7):720–724. doi:10.3109/01443615.2013.812623

  39. Venkat P, Chen LM, Young-Lin N, Kiet TK, Young G, Amatori D et al (2012) An economic analysis of robotic versus laparoscopic surgery for endometrial cancer: Costs, charges and reimbursements to hospitals and professionals. Gynecol Oncol 125(1):237–240. doi:10.1016/j.ygyno.2011.11.036

  40. Verheijen R, Zweemer R (2012) Robotic surgery for gynaecologic cancer: an overview. Curr Oncol Rep 14(6):544–549. doi:10.1007/s11912-012-0270-8

  41. Walker JL, Piedmonte MR, Spirtos NM, Eisenkop SM, Schlaerth JB, Mannel RS et al (2009) Laparoscopy compared with laparotomy for comprehensive surgical staging of uterine cancer: gynecologic Oncology Group Study LAP2. J Clin Oncol 27(32):5331–5336. doi:10.1200/JCO.2009.22.3248

  42. Wells GA, Shea B, O’Connell D, Peterson J, Welch V, Losos M et al (2015) The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) for assessing the quality of nonrandomised studies in meta-analyses. http://www.ohri.ca/programs/clinical_epidemiology/oxford.asp. Accessed 13 December 2015

  43. Zhou J, Xiong BH, Ma L, Cheng Y, Huang W, Zhao L (2015) Robotic vs laparoscopic radical hysterectomy for cervical cancer: a meta-analysis. Int J Med Robot. doi:10.1002/rcs.1652

Download references

Author information

Correspondence to Jiaxin Yang.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Xie, W., Cao, D., Yang, J. et al. Robot-assisted surgery versus conventional laparoscopic surgery for endometrial cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol 142, 2173–2183 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00432-016-2180-x

Download citation


  • Robot-assisted surgery
  • Conventional laparoscopic surgery
  • Endometrial cancer
  • Perioperative outcomes
  • Meta-analysis