BACKGROUND: This study was a secondary analysis of the ROBOGYN-1004 trial conducted between 2010 and 2015. The study aimed to identify factors that affect postoperative morbidity after either robot-assisted laparoscopy (RL) or conventional laparoscopy (CL) in gynecologic oncology.
METHODS: The study used two-level logistic regression analyses to evaluate the prognostic and predictive value of patient, surgery, and center characteristics in predicting severe postoperative morbidity 6 months after surgery.
RESULTS: This analysis included 368 patients. Severe morbidity occurred in 49 (28 %) of 176 patients who underwent RL versus 41 (21 %) of 192 patients who underwent CL (p = 0.15). In the multivariate analysis, after adjustment for the treatment group (RL vs CL), the risk of severe morbidity increased significantly for patients who had poorer performance status, with an odds ratio (OR) of 1.62 for the 1-point difference in the WHO performance score (95 % CI 1.06-2.47; p = 0.027) and according to the type of surgery (p < 0.001). A focus on complex surgical acts showed significant more morbidity in the RL group than in the CL group at the less experienced centers (OR, 3.31; 95 % CI 1.0-11; p = 0.05) compared with no impact at the experienced centers (OR, 0.87; 95 % CI 0.38-1.99; p = 0.75).
CONCLUSIONS: The findings suggest that the center\'s experience may have an impact on the risk of morbidity for patients undergoing complex robot-assisted surgical procedures.

Vaginectomy has been shown to be effective for select patients with vaginal high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions (HSIL) and is favored by gynecologists, while there are few reports on the robotic-assisted laparoscopic vaginectomy (RALV). The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety and treatment outcomes between RALV and the conventional laparoscopic vaginectomy (CLV) for patients with vaginal HSIL.
This retrospective cohort study was conducted in 109 patients with vaginal HSIL who underwent either RALV (RALV group) or CLV (CLV group) from December 2013 to May 2022. The operative data, homogeneous HPV infection regression rate and vaginal HSIL regression rate were compared between the two groups. Student\'s t-test, the Mann-Whitney U test, Pearson χ2 test or the Fisher exact test, Kaplan-Meier survival analysis and Cox proportional-hazards models were used for data analysis.
There were 32 patients in the RALV group and 77 patients in the CLV group. Compared with the CLV group, patients in the RALV group demonstrated less estimated blood loss (41.6 ± 40.3 mL vs. 68.1 ± 56.4 mL, P = 0.017), lower intraoperative complications rate (6.3% vs. 24.7%, P = 0.026), and shorter flatus passing time (2.0 (1.0-2.0) vs. 2.0 (2.0-2.0), P < 0.001), postoperative catheterization time (2.0 (2.0-3.0) vs. 4.0 (2.0-6.0), P = 0.001) and postoperative hospitalization time (4.0 (4.0-5.0) vs. 5.0 (4.0-6.0), P = 0.020). In addition, the treatment outcomes showed that both RALV group and CLV group had high homogeneous HPV infection regression rate (90.0% vs. 92.0%, P > 0.999) and vaginal HSIL regression rate (96.7% vs. 94.7%, P = 0.805) after vaginectomy. However, the RALV group had significantly higher hospital costs than that in the CLV group (53035.1 ± 9539.0 yuan vs. 32706.8 ± 6659.2 yuan, P < 0.001).
Both RALV and CLV can achieve satisfactory treatment outcomes, while RALV has the advantages of less intraoperative blood loss, fewer intraoperative complications rate and faster postoperative recovery. Robotic-assisted surgery has the potential to become a better choice for vaginectomy in patients with vaginal HSIL without regard to the burden of hospital costs.

Laparoscopy and robotics are recommended for managing gynecological cancer, as they are associated with lower morbidity and comparable outcomes to open surgery. However, in the case of early cervical cancer, new evidence suggests worse oncological outcomes with these approaches compared to open surgery, though the limited number of robotic cases makes it challenging to draw definitive conclusions for this particular approach. The prior conization has been proposed as a strategy to reduce the risk of tumor spillage and contamination during minimally invasive (MIS) radical hysterectomy (RH). Retrospective studies have indicated that undergoing conization before RH is linked to a reduced risk of recurrences, especially in cervical tumors measuring less than 2 cm. Nevertheless, these studies lack the statistical power needed to definitively establish conization as a recommended step before RH. Furthermore, these studies do not have enough cases utilizing the robotic approach and specific conclusions cannot be drawn from this technique. The question of whether a subset of cases would benefit from preoperative conization and whether conization should be performed to recommend MIS over open surgery remains unanswered. Prospective clinical trials involving women diagnosed with early-stage cervical cancer <2 cm, randomized between undergoing conization before robotic RH or without prior conization are mandatory to assess the role of conization before robotic RH in cervical cancer.

Robotic-assisted laparoscopy (RALS) has gained widespread acceptance in the field of gynecological oncology. However, whether the prognosis of endometrial cancer after RALS is superior to conventional laparoscopy (CLS) and laparotomy (LT) remains inconclusive. Therefore, the aim of this meta-analysis was to compare the long-term survival outcomes of RALS with CLS and LT for endometrial cancer.
A systematic literature search was conducted on electronic databases (PubMed, Cochrane, EMBASE and Web of Science) until May 24, 2022, followed by a manual search. Based on inclusion and exclusion criteria, publications investigating long-term survival outcomes after RALS vs CLS or LT in endometrial cancer patients were collected. The primary outcomes included overall survival (OS), disease-specific survival (DSS), recurrence-free survival (RFS) and disease-free survival (DFS). Fixed effects models or random effects models were employed to calculate the pooled hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) as appropriate. Heterogeneity and publication bias were also assessed.
RALS and CLS had no difference in OS (HR = 0.962, 95% CI: 0.922-1.004), RFS (HR = 1.096, 95% CI: 0.947-1.296), and DSS (HR = 1.489, 95% CI: 0.713-3.107) for endometrial cancer; however, RALS was significantly associated with favorable OS (HR = 0.682, 95% CI: 0.576-0.807), RFS (HR = 0.793, 95% CI: 0.653-0.964), and DSS (HR = 0.441, 95% CI: 0.298-0.652) when compared with LT. In the subgroup analysis of effect measures and follow-up length, RALS showed comparable or superior RFS/OS to CLS and LT. In early-stage endometrial cancer patients, RALS had similar OS but worse RFS than CLS.
RALS is safe in the management of endometrial cancer, with long-term oncological outcomes equivalent to CLS and superior to LT.

To demonstrate the advantages of a combined robotic-assisted laparoscopic and thoracic approach in the management of extensive diaphragmatic, pleural, and pericardial endometriosis.
A video article demonstrating excision of endometriosis from pericardium, diaphragm, and pleura.
Thoracic endometriosis is the most common site of extrapelvic endometriosis [1]. Surgical treatment aims to excise all visible disease to relief symptoms and prevent recurrence [2-4].
A 41-year-old lady with cyclical shoulder tip and chest pain and known extensive diaphragmatic endometriosis was referred to our center. The procedure was done jointly by a gynecologist and a thoracic surgeon experienced in robotic-assisted endometriosis excision (Supplemental Video 1). Robotic-assisted laparoscopy revealed extensive full-thickness diaphragmatic endometriosis and a full-thickness pericardial nodule. Pericardial endometriosis excision was performed and a 1 cm defect was left open in the pericardium. Multiple diaphragmatic endometriotic nodules were excised and pleural cavity was entered (Image 2). On robotic-assisted thoracic surgery, further deep endometriotic lesions were detected and excised from the posterior aspect of the diaphragm. These lesions were not identified abdominally despite complete division of falciform ligament, full mobilization of the liver, and the use of a 30-degree scope. Superficial endometriotic lesions on parietal pleura were also detected (Image 3) and excised. The defects on the diaphragm were closed (Image 4). Chest and abdominal drains were left in situ. The patient was discharged on day 4.
The combined robotic-assisted laparoscopic and thoracic approach is indicated in selected cases and allows full exploration of the thoracic cavity and both sides of the diaphragm, thus preventing incomplete excision of the disease. Robotic surgery also allows smooth dual-surgeon teamwork.

BACKGROUND: Robotic-assisted laparoscopy still lacks wide acceptance in infants and children. We developed the service and report the largest single institution experience of complications over a period of 11 years.
METHODS: Between March 2006 and May 2017, consecutive infants and children who underwent robotic assisted laparoscopy under the care of two laparoscopic surgeons were studied. Data for patients, surgeons, year of surgery, operation, and timing, nature, grades of complications were assessed.
RESULTS: A total of 601 robotic procedures (45 different types) were carried out in 539 patients. Of these 31 (5.8%) were converted, none for operative complications. These and another 4 with complicated co-morbidity were excluded, leaving 504 patients for further analysis. There were 60 (11.9%) complications in 57 (11.3%) patients. Mean (SD) age was 7.7 years -/+5.1 with the youngest being 4 weeks. Concomitant or bilateral robotic and non-robotic procedures took place in 8.1% and 13.3% of patients respectively. Significant medical co-morbidity and abdominal scarring were present in 29% and 14.9% of patients respectively. Complications occurred in theatre 1.6%, hospital 5.6%, 28 days 1.2%, and late 3.6%. Mean follow up was 7.6 years -/+ 3.1 SD. Over-all postoperative complication rate was 10.3%: CD grade I 6.5% (33), II 0.6% (3), and IIIa/b 3.2% (16) which included 1.4% (7) re-do surgery. Most (11/16) grade III occurred late. There were no bleeding, grade IV or V complications, surgical mortality, or technology related complications.
CONCLUSIONS: Complications are low even during the learning phase and while developing the new technique. Most complications occurred early and were minor. Most high-grade complications presented late.
METHODS: 2B.

UNASSIGNED: Robotic-assisted surgery is one of the novel minimally invasive surgical techniques for the treatment of gynecological malignancies. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to compare the outcomes of robot-assisted vs. conventional laparoscopy for para-aortic lymphadenectomy (PAL) in patients with gynecological malignancies.
UNASSIGNED: An electronic search in PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and Google Scholar databases was performed for articles, published up to 01st November 2021. Outcomes including operating time (OT), total blood loss (TBL), length of stay (LOS), and complication rate (CR) in robot-assisted vs. conventional laparoscopy were investigated.
UNASSIGNED: A total of nine studies (7 non-RCTs and 2 RCTs) involving 914 participants were included. Of them, 332 patients underwent robotic laparoscopy (robotic group) and 582-conventional laparoscopy (conventional laparoscopy group). A significant decrease in TBL (MD = -149.1; 95% CI: -218.4 to -79.91) [ml] was observed in the robotic group as compared to the conventional laparoscopy group. However, no significant difference was noted for OT, CR, and LOS in the overall findings. Further subgroup analysis showed that the robotic group had a lower OT in mixed histological populations and studies reporting on the extraperitoneal approach. The lower chance of TBL was observed in mixed histological populations and studies involving extraperitoneal approach, Caucasian population, and non-RCTs design.
UNASSIGNED: Robotic laparoscopy has a significant advantage over the conventional laparoscopy approach for PAL in gynecological malignancies. Further prospective observational studies embedded with a large sample size are needed to validate our findings.

Aortic lymph node metastases are a relative common finding in locally advanced cervical cancer. Minimally invasive surgery is the preferred approach to perform para-aortic lymph nodal staging to reduce complications, hospital stay, and the time to primary treatment. This meta-analysis (CRD42022335095) aimed to compare the surgical outcomes of the two most advanced approaches for the aortic staging procedure: conventional laparoscopy (CL) versus robotic-assisted laparoscopy (RAL). The meta-analysis was conducted according to the PRISMA guideline. The search string included the following keywords: \"Laparoscopy\" (MeSH Unique ID: D010535), \"Robotic Surgical Procedures\" (MeSH Unique ID: D065287), \"Lymph Node Excision\" (MeSH Unique ID: D008197) and \"Aorta\" (MeSH Unique ID: D001011), and \"Uterine Cervical Neoplasms\" (MeSH Unique ID: D002583). A total of 1324 patients were included in the analysis. Overall, 1200 patients were included in the CL group and 124 patients in the RAL group. Estimated blood loss was significantly higher in CL compared with RAL (p = 0.02), whereas hospital stay was longer in RAL compared with CL (p = 0.02). We did not find significant difference for all the other parameters, including operative time, intra- and postoperative complication rate, and number of lymph nodes excised. Based on our data analysis, both CL and RAL are valid options for para-aortic staging lymphadenectomy in locally advanced cervical cancer.

BACKGROUND: Robot-assisted nephrectomy for living kidney donation (LKD) has been described in the literature as a safe and reproducible technique in high volume centers with extensive robotic surgery experience. Any surgical procedure in a healthy individual ought to be safe in regards to complications. The objective of this study was to evaluate the Robotic-assisted Living Donor Nephrectomy (RLDN) experience in a robotic surgery expert center.
METHODS: This is a retrospective study from 11/2011 and 12/2019. In total, 118 consecutive Living Donor (LD) kidney transplants were performed at our institution. All the procedures were performed by robotic-assisted laparoscopic approach. Extraction was performed by iliac (IE), vaginal (VE) or umbilical extraction (UE). The left kidney was preferred even if the vascular anatomy was not modal.
RESULTS: For donors: the median operative time was 120min with 50mL of blood loss. The median warm ischemia time was 4min, with a non-significant shorter duration with the UE (4min) in comparison with IE or VE (5min). Nine patients had postoperative complications including 1 grade II (blood transfusion) and 1 grade IIIb (vaginal bleeding after VE). None of our procedures were converted to open surgeries and no deaths were reported. For the recipients: 1.7% presented delayed graft function; their median GFR at 1 year was 61mL/min/1.73m2.
CONCLUSIONS: RLDN in an expert center appears to be a safe technique. The advantages of the robot device in terms of ergonomy don\'t hamper the surgical outcomes. Donor, recipient and graft survivals seem comparable to the reported laparoscopic outcomes in the literature.
METHODS:

(1) Background: This study aimed to analyze the impact of surgical approach on survival rates in women diagnosed with endometrial cancer. (2) Methods: A retrospective multicenter cohort of 1382 women diagnosed with EC was performed. A total of 684 (49.5%) women underwent minimally invasive surgery, 233 (34%) underwent robotic-assisted laparoscopy (RAL), 451 (66%) underwent conventional laparoscopy (LPS), and 698 (50.5%) underwent open surgery (OP). Sociodemographic features, tumor characteristics, and survival rates were analyzed in the whole sample and in a matched-pair model. (3) Results: Women operated on by OP were significantly older, presented more comorbidities, and had more aggressive tumors. Disease-free (DFS), overall (OS), and specific survival related to EC (SS) amounts were significantly higher for MIS compared to OP (p < 0.001). When matched by age, body mass index, comorbidities, ASA score, histological type, grade, myometrial invasion, and FIGO stage, 798 patients were selected. DFS, OS, and SS amounts were similar between the MIS and OP groups. (4) Conclusions: The surgical approach for women with EC does not impact DFS or OS amounts when matched by homogeneous groups.