In Poland, robotic surgery is nowadays perceived as a new method of surgical treatment in endometrial cancer patients. We aim to present the first Polish group of endometrial cancer patients treated using robotic surgery. The analysis was based on 79 patients with mean age of 59.72 ± 11.709 (range 27-83) years and endometrial cancer scheduled for surgical treatment. Mean BMI was 31.38 ± 8.78 (range 19.03-65.97) kg/m2. The data were collected based on a questionnaire consisting of 19 questions concerning the patient's perception of robotic surgery before the procedure. Patients with a family history of neoplastic diseases indicate precision of movements as the most important reason for choosing robotic surgery (p = 0.0035). Patients after surgery procedures in the past named shorter hospitalization as a major benefit (p = 0.0037). Patients who chose robotic surgery for financial reasons stressed the cosmetic effect as a priority (p = 0.0319). Shorter length of hospital stay, less blood loss, enlarged view, and good visualization were statistically significant reasons for choosing robotic surgery (p < 0.05). Women who consider work, good material status, and well-being as the most important aspects of their lives cited the cosmetic effect as a benefit of robotic surgery (p = 0.0029 vs. p = 0.0074 vs. p = 0.01745, respectively). In the follow-up after operations, no patients regretted choosing robotic surgery. Good visualization, precise movements, less blood loss, and cosmetic effects are the most frequent reasons for choosing robotic surgery. Even patients after other types of surgery in the past decided on robot-assisted radical hysterectomy because of the clear benefits of this approach.

Andrzej Frycz Modrzewski Krakow University Cracow Poland

Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology University Hospital Olomouc Palacky University Medical Faculty Olomouc Czech Republic

Lazarski University Warsaw Poland

LUX MED Oncology Hospital św Wincentego 103 Warsaw Poland

Neohospital Kostrzewskiego 47 Cracow Poland

Zobrazit více v PubMed

Raglan O, Kalliala I, Markozannes G, Cividini S, Gunter M, Nautival J, Gabra H, Paraskevaidis E, Martin-Hirsch P, Tsilidis KK, Kyrgiou M (2019) Risk factors for endometrial cancer: an umbrella review of the literature. Int J Cancer 145(7):1719–1730. https://doi.org/10.1002/ijc.31961 PubMed DOI

Zhao S, Chen L, Zhang Y, Liu W, Liu S, Teng F, Xue F, Wang Y (2022) Endometrial cancer in Lynch syndrome. Int J Cancer 150(1):7–17. https://doi.org/10.1002/ijc.33763 PubMed DOI

Crosbie EJ, Kitson SJ, McAlpine JN, Mukhopadhyay A, Powell ME, Singh N (2022) Endometrial cancer. Lancet 399(10333):1412–1428. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(22)00323-3 PubMed DOI

Concin N, Matias-Guiu X, Vergote I et al (2021) ESGO/ESTRO/ESP guidelines for the management of patients with endometrial carcinoma. Int J Cancer 31:12–39. https://doi.org/10.1136/ijgc-2020-002230 DOI

Reich H (2007) Total laparoscopic hysterectomy: indications, techniques and outcomes. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol 19:337–344. https://doi.org/10.1097/GCO.0b013e328216f99a PubMed DOI

Holloway RW, Patel SD, Ahmad S (2009) Robotic surgery in gynecology. Scand J Surg 98:96–109. https://doi.org/10.1177/145749690909800205 PubMed DOI

Backes FJ, Fowler JM (2014) Hysterectomy for the treatment of gynecologic malignancy. Clin Obstet Gynecol 57(1):115–127. https://doi.org/10.1097/GRF.0000000000000006 PubMed DOI

Iavazzo C, Gkegkes ID (2015) Enhanced recovery programme in robotic hysterectomy. Br J Nurs 24(16):S4-8. https://doi.org/10.12968/bjon.2015.24.Sup16.S4 PubMed DOI

Kehlet H, Wilmore DW (2008) Evidence-based surgical care and the evolution of fast-track surgery. Ann Surg 248(2):189–198. https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0b013e31817f2c1a PubMed DOI

Gungorduk K, Kahramanoglu O, Ozdemir IA, Kahramanoglu I (2021) Robotic platforms for endometrial Cancer treatment review of the literaturę. Minerva Med 112(1):47–54. https://doi.org/10.23736/S0026-4806.20.07053-6 PubMed DOI

Herling SF (2016) Robotic-assisted laparoscopic hysterectomy for women with endometrial cancer—complications, women’s experiences, quality of life and a health economic evaluation. Dan Med J 63(7):B5262 PubMed

Zhao Y, Liu Z, Yu L, Liu S, Yan H, Zhang Y, Yao Y (2020) Robotic surgery in obese patients with early-stage endometrial cancer. Videosurg Other Miniinv Tech 15(1):171–175. https://doi.org/10.5114/wiitm.2019.89337 DOI

Zeng XZ, Lavoue V, Lau S, Press JZ, Abitbol J, Gotlieb R, How J, Wang Y, Gotlieb WH (2014) Outcome of robotic surgery for endometrial cancer as a function of patient age. Int J Gynecol Cancer 25(4):637–644. https://doi.org/10.1097/IGC.0000000000000411 DOI

Göçmen A, Sanlıkan F, Uçar MG (2010) Comparison of robotic-assisted surgery outcomes with laparotomy for endometrial cancer staging in Turkey. Arch Gynecol Obstet 282(5):539–545. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-010-1593-z PubMed DOI

Mateshaytis J, Brawner M, Steed H, Pin S (2022) Improving the rate of same-day discharge in gynecologic oncology patients with endometrial cancer undergoing minimally invasive robotic surgery: a quality improvement initiative. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 29(10):1184–1193. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmig.2022.07.006 PubMed DOI

Mok ZW, Yong EL, Low JJ, Ng J (2012) Clinical outcomes in endometrial cancer care when the standard of care shifts from open surgery to robotics. Int J Gynecol Cancer 22(5):819–825. https://doi.org/10.1097/IGC.0b013e31824c5cd2 PubMed DOI

Leitao MM, Malhotra V, Briscoe G, Suidan R, Dholakiya P, Santos K, Jewell EL, Brown CL, Sonoda Y, Abu-Rustum NR, Barakat RR, Gardner GJ (2013) Postoperative pain medication requirements in patients undergoing computer-assisted (“Robotic”) and standard laparoscopic procedures for newly diagnosed endometrial Cancer. Ann Surg Oncol 20(11):3561–3567. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-013-3064-9 PubMed DOI

Giannini A, Magrina JF, Magtibay PM, Butler KA (2023) Same-day dismissal for endometrial cancer robotic surgery: feasibility factors. Updates Surg 75(3):743–755. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13304-022-01424-0 PubMed DOI

Siesto G, Romano F, Iedà NP, Vitobello D (2020) Survival outcomes after surgical management of endometrial cancer: analysis after the first 10-year experience of robotic surgery in a single center. Int J Med Robot 16(6):1–9. https://doi.org/10.1002/rcs.2157 PubMed DOI

Mäenpää M, Nieminen K, Tomás E, Luukkaala T, Mäenpää JU (2015) Implementing robotic surgery to gynecologic oncology: the first 300 operations performed at a tertiary hospital. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 94:482–488. https://doi.org/10.1111/aogs.12620 PubMed DOI

Lee EK, Baack J, Duchene AD (2010) Survey of practicing urologists: robotic versus open radical prostatectomy. Can J Urol 17(2):5094–5098 PubMed

Kwon W, Jang J, Park JW, Han IW, Kang MJ, Kim S (2014) Which method of pancreatic surgery do medical consumers prefer among open, laparoscopic, or robotic surgery? A survey. Ann Surg Treat Res 86(1):7–15. https://doi.org/10.4174/astr.2014.86.1.7 PubMed DOI PMC

Xu J, Dailey RK, Eggly S, Neale AV, Schwartz KL (2011) Men’s perspectives on selecting their prostate cancer treatment. J Natl Med Assoc 103(6):468–478. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0027-9684(15)30359-x PubMed DOI

Lau S, Aubin S, Rosberger Z, Gourdji I, How J, Gotlieb R et al (2014) Health-related quality of life following robotic surgery: a pilot study. J Obstet Gynaecol Can 36(12):1071–1078. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1701-2163(15)30384-4 PubMed DOI

Armstrong BK, White E, Saracci R (1992) Principles of exposure measurement in epidemiology. Oxford University Press, New York DOI

Harrop E, Kelly J, Griffiths G, Casbard A, Nelson A, Published on behalf of the BOLERO Trial Management Group (2016) Why do patients decline surgical trials? Findings from a qualitative interview study embedded in the Cancer Research UK BOLERO trial (Bladder cancer: open versus Lapararoscopic or RObotic cystectomy). Trials 19(17):35. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13063-016-1173-z DOI

Paramasivan S, Huddart R, Hall E, Lewis R, Birtle A, Donovan J (2011) Key issues in recruitment to randomized controlled trials with very different interventions: a qualititative investigation of recruitment to the SPARE trial (CRUK/07/011). Trials 15:12–78

Mills N, Donovan J, Smith M, Jacoby A, Neal D, Hamdy F (2003) Perceptions of equipoise are crucial to trial participation: a qualitative study of men in the ProtecT study. Control Clin Trials 24:272–282 PubMed DOI

Moynihan C, Lewis R, Hall E, Jones E, Birtle A, Huddart R (2012) The patient deficit model overtumed: a qualitative study of patients’ perceptions of invitation to participate in a randomized controlled trial comparing selective bladder preservation against surgery in muscle invasive bladder cancer (SPARF, CRUK/07/011). Trials 13:228 PubMed DOI PMC

Donovan JL, Mills N, Smith M, Brindle L, Jacoby A, Peters TJ et al (2002) Improving the design and conduct of randomized trials by embedding them in quantitive research: the PtotecT study. BMJ 325:766–770 PubMed DOI PMC

Winters Z, Emson M, Griffin C, Mills J, Hopwood P, Bidad N et al (2015) Learning from the QUEST multicentre feasibility randomization trials in breast reconstruction after mastectomy. Br J Surg 102:45–56 PubMed DOI

National Cancer Research Institute (NCRI). Challenges and opportunities in surgical cancer research in the UK, London: National Cancer Research Institute; 2012

Smith N, Castle P, Gonzalgo M, Svatek R, Weizer A, Montgomery J et al (2015) The Razor (randomized open vs robotic cystectomy) trial: study design and update. BJU Int 115(2):198–205 PubMed DOI PMC

Teoh JY-C, Cacciamani GE, Gomez Rivas J (2021) Social media and misinformation in urology: what can be done? BJU Int 128:397 PubMed DOI