Skip to main content

Robotic-Assisted Radical Hysterectomy (RRH) as Nerve-Sparing Procedure

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Hysterectomy
  • 714 Accesses

Abstract

Nerve-sparing radical hysterectomy (NSRH) is procedure to preserve pelvic autonomic nerves and provides ealier return of bladder function, better vaginal blood flow, and fewer symptoms related to anorectal function. Pelvic autonomic nerves compose of superior hypogastric plexus, pelvic splanchnic nerves, sacral splanchnic nerves, inferior hypogastric plexus, and vesical branch of infeior hypogastric plexus. Advanced robotic technologies including exellent 3-dimensional image amplication, articulating movement of the robotic arms, lack of tremor, and strable traction and contertraction have given us easy differentiation and preservation of pelvic autonomic nerves. In this chapter, we will discribe the concept of nerve-sparing radical hystrectomy and its detail robotic surgical technique by step by step with detail surgical images.

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

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 229.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 299.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 449.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover 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

References

  1. Piver MS, Rutledge F, Smith JP. Five classes of extended hysterectomy for women with cervical cancer. Obstet Gynecol. 1974;44:265–72.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Pieterse QD, Maas CP, ter Kuile MM, Lowik M, van Eijkeren MA, Trimbos JB, Kenter GG. An observational longitudinal study to evaluate miction, defecation, and sexual function after radical hysterectomy with pelvic lymphadenectomy for early-stage cervical cancer. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2006;16:1119–29.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Barnes W, Waggoner S, Delgado G, Maher K, Potkul R, Barter J, Benjamin S. Manometric characterization of rectal dysfunction following radical hysterectomy. Gynecol Oncol. 1991;42:116–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Bergmark K, Avall-Lundqvist E, Dickman PW, Henningsohn L, Steineck G. Vaginal changes and sexuality in women with a history of cervical cancer. N Engl J Med. 1999;340:1383–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Fujii S, Takakura K, Matsumura N, Higuchi T, Yura S, Mandai M, Baba T, Yoshioka S. Anatomic identification and functional outcomes of the nerve sparing Okabayashi radical hysterectomy. Gynecol Oncol. 2007;107:4–13.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Possover M, Stöber S, Plaul K, Schneider A. Identification and preservation of the motoric innervation of the bladder in radical hysterectomy type III. Gynecol Oncol. 2000;79:154–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Chong GO, Park NY, Hong DG, Cho YL, Park IS, Lee YS. Learning curve of laparoscopic radical hysterectomy with pelvic and/or para-aortic lymphadenectomy in the early and locally advanced cervical cancer: comparison of the first 50 and second 50 cases. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2009;19:1459–64.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Pieterse QD, Ter Kuile MM, Deruiter MC, Trimbos JB, Kenter GG, Maas CP. Vaginal blood flow after radical hysterectomy with and without nerve sparing. A preliminary report. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2008;18:576–83.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Cibula D, Velechovska P, Sláma J, Fischerova D, Pinkavova I, Pavlista D, Dundr P, Hill M, Freitag P, Zikan M. Late morbidity following nerve-sparing radical hysterectomy. Gynecol Oncol. 2010;116:506–11.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Long Y, Yao DS, Pan XW, Ou TY. Clinical efficacy and safety of nerve-sparing radical hysterectomy for cervical cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS One. 2014;9:–e94116.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Kim HS, Kim K, Ryoo SB, Seo JH, Kim SY, Park JW, Kim MA, Hong KS, Jeong CW, Song YS, Study Group FUSION. Conventional versus nerve-sparing radical surgery for cervical cancer: a meta-analysis. J Gynecol Oncol. 2015;26:100–10.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  13. Landoni F, Maneo A, Cormio G, Perego P, Milani R, Caruso O, Mangioni C, Class II. versus class III radical hysterectomy in stage IB-IIA cervical cancer: a prospective randomized study. Gynecol Oncol. 2001;80:3–12.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Höckel M, Konerding MA, Heussel CP. Liposuction-assisted nerve-sparing extended radical hysterectomy: oncologic rationale, surgical anatomy, and feasibility study. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1998;178:971–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Girardi F, Lichtenegger W, Tamussino K, Haas J. The importance of parametrial lymph nodes in the treatment of cervical cancer. Gynecol Oncol. 1989;34:206–11.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Landoni F, Bocciolone L, Perego P, Maneo A, Bratina G, Mangioni C. Cancer of the cervix, FIGO stages IB and IIA: patterns of local growth and paracervical extension. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 1995;5:329–34.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Hagen B, Shepherd JH, Jacobs IJ. Parametrial resection for invasive cervical cancer. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2000;10:1–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Frumovitz M, Ramirez PT, Greer M, Gregurich MA, Wolf J, Bodurka DC, Levenback C. Laparoscopic training and practice in gynecologic oncology among Society of Gynecologic Oncologists members and fellows-in-training. Gynecol Oncol. 2004;94:746–53.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Marchal F, Rauch P, Vandromme J, Laurent I, Lobontiu A, Ahcel B, Verhaeghe JL, Meistelman C, Degueldre M, Villemot JP, Guillemin F. Telerobotic-assisted laparoscopic hysterectomy for benign and oncologic pathologies: initial clinical experience with 30 patients. Surg Endosc. 2005;19:826–31.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Magrina JF, Pawlina W, Kho RM, Magtibay PM. Robotic nerve-sparing radical hysterectomy: feasibility and technique. Gynecol Oncol. 2011;121:605–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Boggess JF, Gehrig PA, Cantrell L, Shafer A, Ridgway M, Skinner EN, Fowler WCA. 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Magrina JF, Kho RM, Weaver AL, Montero RP, Magtibay PM. Robotic radical hysterectomy: comparison with laparoscopy and laparotomy. Gynecol Oncologia. 2008;109:86–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Ko EM, Muto MG, Berkowitz RS, Feltmate CM. Robotic versus open radical hysterectomy: a comparative study at a single institution. Gynecol Oncol. 2008;111:425–30.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. 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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Chong GO, Lee YH, Hong DG, Cho YL, Park IS, Lee YS. Robot versus laparoscopic nerve-sparing radical hysterectomy for cervical cancer: a comparison of the intraoperative and perioperative results of a single surgeon's initial experience. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2013;23:1145–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. van den Tillaart SA, Kenter GG, Peters AA, Dekker FW, Gaarenstroom KN, Fleuren GJ, Trimbos JB. Nerve-sparing radical hysterectomy: local recurrence rate, feasibility, and safety in cervical cancer patients stage IA to IIA. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2009;19:39–45.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Correia JA, De-Ary-Pires B, Pires-Neto MA, De Ary-Pires R. The developmental anatomy of the human superior hypogastric plexus: a morphometrical investigation with clinical and surgical correlations. Clin Anat. 2010;23:962–70.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Havenga K, DeRuiter MC, Enker WE, Welvaart K. Anatomical basis of autonomic nerve-preserving total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer. Br J Surg. 1996;83:384–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Baader B, Herrmann M. Topography of the pelvic autonomic nervous system and its potential impact on surgical intervention in the pelvis. Clin Anat. 2003;16:119–30.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Maas CP, Trimbos JB, DeRuiter MC, van de Velde CJ, Kenter GG. Nerve sparing radical hysterectomy: latest developments and historical perspective. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol. 2003;48:271–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Fujii S. Anatomic identification of nerve-sparing radical hysterectomy: a step-by-step procedure. Gynecol Oncologia. 2008;111:S33–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Yalla SV, Andriole GL. Vesicourethral dysfunction following pelvic visceral ablative surgery. J Urol. 1984;132:503–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Smith AN, Varma JS, Binnie NR, Papachrysostomou M. Disordered colorectal motility in intractable constipation following hysterectomy. Br J Surg. 1990;77:1361–5.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Levin RJ. The physiology of sexual function in women. Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 1980;7:213–52.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Virtanen H, Hirvonen T, Mäkinen J, Kiilholma P. Outcome of thirty patients who underwent repair of posthysterectomy prolapse of the vaginal vault with abdominal sacral colpopexy. J Am Coll Surg. 1994;178:283–7.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Johnson RM, McGuire EJ. Urogenital complications of anterior approaches to the lumbar spine. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1981;154:114–8.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Park NY, Cho YL, Park IS, Lee YS. Laparoscopic pelvic anatomy of nerve-sparing radical hysterectomy. Clin Anat. 2010;23:186–91.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Lee YS, Chong GO, Lee YH, Hong DG, Cho YL, Park IS. Robot-assisted total preservation of the pelvic autonomic nerve with extended systematic lymphadenectomy as part of nerve-sparing radical hysterectomy for cervical cancer. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2013;23:1133–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Chong GO, Lee YH, Hong DG, Cho YL, Lee YS. Anatomical variations of the internal iliac veins in the presacral area: clinical implications during sacral colpopepxy or extended pelvic lymphadenectomy. Clin Anat. 2015;28:661–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Shazly SA, Murad MH, Dowdy SC, Gostout BS, Famuyide AO. Robotic radical hysterectomy in early stage cervical cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Gynecol Oncol. 2015;138:457–71.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Yoon S. Lee .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Chong, G.O., Lee, Y.S. (2018). Robotic-Assisted Radical Hysterectomy (RRH) as Nerve-Sparing Procedure. In: Alkatout, I., Mettler, L. (eds) Hysterectomy. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-22497-8_68

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-22497-8_68

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-22496-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-22497-8

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics