Advertisement

Radical Hysterectomy

  • Brooke A. Schlappe
  • Mario M. LeitaoJr.
  • Yukio Sonoda
Chapter

Abstract

Radical hysterectomy has been a mainstay in the management of early-stage cervical cancer. With the advent of laparoscopy, and subsequently robotic surgery, more radical hysterectomies are now performed in a minimally invasive fashion. Minimally invasive radical hysterectomies entail greater complexity compared to simple hysterectomies. However, the robotic platform (the da Vinci Si® or Xi®; Intuitive Surgical, Sunnyvale, CA) offers improved visualization, dexterity, and better ergonomics for the surgeon. The robotic platform has some significant advantages compared with conventional laparoscopy. The instruments used in laparoscopy lack flexibility, and the surgeon must operate while standing and looking at a two-dimensional monitor. In the robotic system, the surgeon may remain seated; visualization is provided by a high-definition, three-dimensional camera; and wristed instruments are operated by movement of the surgeon’s hands through use of the EndoWrist® instrument, which affords extraordinary dexterity. In addition, three robotic arms may be used simultaneously. For the practiced clinician, utilization of the robot is advantageous in both simple and complex cases. This chapter will address the data supporting the use of the robotic platform for radical hysterectomy. We will also describe the procedure in a step-by-step fashion.

Keywords

Radical hysterectomy Robotic-assisted Minimally invasive Cervical cancer Endometrial cancer 

References

  1. 1.
    Hoogendam JP, Verheijen RHM, Wegner I, Zweemer RP. Oncological outcome and long-term complications in robot-assisted radical surgery for early stage cervical cancer: an observational cohort study. BJOG. 2014;121:1538–45.CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Sert B, Abeler V. Robotic radical hysterectomy in early-stage cervical carcinoma patients, comparing results with total laparoscopic radical hysterectomy cases. The future is now? Int J Med Robot Comput Assist Surg. 2007;3:224–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Boggess JF, Gehrig PA, Cantrell L, Shafer A, Ridgway M, Skinner EN, et al. A case-control study of robot-assisted type III radical hysterectomy with pelvic lymph node dissection compared with open radical hysterectomy. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2008;199:357.e1–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Magrina J, Kho RM, Weaver AL, Montero RP, Magtibay PM. Robotic radical hysterectomy: comparison with laparoscopy and laparotomy. Gynecol Oncol. 2008;109:86–91.CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Geisler JP, Orr CJ, Khurshid N, Phibbs G, Manahan KJ. Robotically assisted laparoscopic radical hysterectomy compared with open radical hysterectomy. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2010;20:438–42.CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Conrad LB, Ramirez PT, Burke W, Naumann RW, Ring KL, Munsell MF, et al. Role of minimally invasive surgery in gynecologic oncology: an updated survey of members of the Society of Gynecologic Oncology. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2015;25:1121–7.CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Soliman PT, Frumovitz M, Sun CC, dos Reis R, Schmeler KM, Nick AM, et al. Radical hysterectomy: a comparison of surgical approaches after adoption of robotic surgery in gynecologic oncology. Gynecol Oncol. 2011;123:333–6.CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Estape R, Lambrou N, Diaz R, Estape E, Dunkin N, Rivera A. A case matched analysis of robotic radical hysterectomy with lymphadenectomy compared with laparoscopy and laparotomy. Gynecol Oncol. 2009;113:357–61.CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Chen CH, Chiu LH, Chang CW, Yen YK, Huang YH, Liu WM. Comparing robotic surgery with conventional laparoscopy and laparotomy for cervical cancer management. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2014;24:1105–11.CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Cantrell LA, Mendivil A, Gehrig PA, Boggess JF. Survival outcomes for women undergoing type III robotic radical hysterectomy for cervical cancer: a 3-year experience. Gynecol Oncol. 2010;117:260–5.CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Piver MS, Rutledge F, Smith JP. Five classes of extended hysterectomy for women with cervical cancer. Obstet Gynecol. 1974;44:265–72.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Querleu D, Morrow CP. Classification of radical hysterectomy. Lancet Oncol. 2008;9:297–303.CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Lecuru F, Mathevet P, Querleu D, Leblanc E, Morice P, Darai E, et al. Bilateral negative sentinel nodes accurately predict absence of lymph node metastasis in early cervical cancer: results of the SENTICOL study. J Clin Oncol. 2011;29:1686–91.CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Cormier B, Diaz JP, Shih K, Sampsom RM, Sonoda Y, Park KJ, et al. Establishing a sentinel lymph node mapping algorithm for the treatment of early cervical cancer. Gynecol Oncol. 2011;122:275–80.CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Altgassen C, Hermann H, Brandstadt A, Kohler C, Durst M, Schneider A. Multicenter validation study of the sentinel lymph node concept in cervical cancer: AGO study group. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26:2943–51.CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Holman LL, Levenback CF, Frumovitz M. Sentinel lymph node evaluation in women with cervical cancer. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2014;21:540–5.CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Wright JD, Herzog TJ, Neugut AI, Burke WM, Lu YS, Lewin SN, et al. Comparative effectiveness of minimally invasive and abdominal radical hysterectomy for cervical cancer. Gynecol Oncol. 2012;127:11–7.CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Reynisson P, Persson J. Hospital costs for robot-assisted laparoscopic radical hysterectomy and pelvic lymphadenectomy. Gynecol Oncol. 2013;130:95–9.CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Penner KR, Fleming ND, Barlavi L, Axtell AE, Lentz SE. Same-day discharge is feasible and safe in patients undergoing minimally invasive staging for gynecologic malignancies. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2015;212:186.e1–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Smith B, Backes F. The role of sentinel lymph nodes in endometrial and cervical cancer. J Surg Oncol. 2015;112:753–60.CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Buda A, Di Martino G, Vecchione F, Bussi B, Dell'Anna T, Palazzi S, et al. Optimizing strategies for sentinel lymph node mapping in early-stage cervical and endometrial cancer: comparison of real-time fluorescence with indocyanine green and methylene blue. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2015;25(8):1513.CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Abu-Rustum NR, Khoury-Collado F, Gemignani ML. Techniques of sentinel lymph node identification for early-stage cervical and uterine cancer. Gynecol Oncol. 2008;111:S44–50.CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Ramirez PT, Frumovitz M, Dos Reis R, Milam MR, Bevers MW, Levenback CF, et al. Modified uterine manipulator and vaginal rings for total laparoscopic radical hysterectomy. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2008;18:571–5.CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Leitao MM Jr, Sert MB. Robot-assisted laparoscopic radical hysterectomy. In: Abu-Rustum NR, Barakat RR, Levine DA, editors. Atlas of procedures in gynecologic oncology. 3rd ed. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press; 2013.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Andou M, Kanao H, Ota Y, Hada T. Laparoscopic radical hysterectomy. In: Abu-Rustum NR, Barakat RR, Levine DA, editors. Atlas of procedures in gynecologic oncology. 3rd ed. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press; 2013.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Schiavone MB, Bielen MS, Gardner GJ, Zivanovic O, Jewell EL, Sonoda Y, et al. Herniation formation in women undergoing robotically assisted laparoscopy or laparotomy for endometrial cancer. Gynecol Oncol. 2016;140:383–6.CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Ramirez PT, Frumovitz M, Pareja R, Lopez A, Vieira MA, Ribeiro R. Phase III randomized trial of laparoscopic or robotic versus abdominal radical hysterectomy in patients with early-stage cervical cancer: LACC trial. Society of Gynecologic Oncology Annual Meeting, 2018.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Brooke A. Schlappe
    • 1
  • Mario M. LeitaoJr.
    • 1
  • Yukio Sonoda
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of SurgeryMemorial Sloan Kettering Cancer CenterNew YorkUSA

Personalised recommendations