Related Experiment Video
Updated: Mar 29, 2026
Surgical Robot-Assisted Transanal Specimen Extraction Radical Sigmoidectomy Without an Auxiliary Abdominal Incision
Published on: June 13, 2025
Comparison of conventional laparoscopy and robotic radical hysterectomy for early-stage cervical cancer: A
Xianhua Hao, Shuzhai Han, Yunfei Wang1
1Department of Gynaecology, Jining Medical College Affiliated Hospital, Jining Medical University, Jining, Shandong 272029, PR, China.
Background:
Cervical cancer continues to be a global burden for women, with >500,000 cases and 275,000 deaths reported annually. Resources-rich countries have seen a dramatic reduction in the prevalence of invasive cervical cancer due to widely accessed radical hysterectomy (RH). We aimed to compare initial surgical outcomes and complication rates of conventional laparoscopic RH (LRH) and robotic RH (RRH) for treating cervical cancer through a systematic meta-analysis.
Methods:
PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library databases were systematically searched for all relevant studies. Data were abstracted independently. A meta-analysis was performed to compare intra- and post-operative outcomes for the two techniques.
Results:
A total of 12 clinical trials were identified. Meta-analysis showed that although LRH and RRH were similar in terms of operating time, the length of hospital stay, and a number of pelvic lymph nodes resected, RRH presented less blood loss and overwhelming advantage against LRH with the respect of complications.
Conclusion:
RRH may be a reliable technique for treating early cervical cancer. Available evidence suggests that it is better than LRH for postoperative recovery, while the two techniques involve similar surgical outcomes and share the same limits in clinical practice.
