[Comparison of robotic surgery with laparoscopy for surgical staging of endometrial cancer: a meta-analysis]

Objective: To evaluate the safety and effectiveness of robotic surgery in surgical staging of endometrial cancer. Methods: Searched English and Chinese databases, including Cochrane library, PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, China National Knowledge Internet, data base of Wanfang, China Science and Technology Journal (CSTJ) , and relevant journals and magazines by hand from Jan. 2000 to Oct. 2016. (1) In accordance with the inclusion criteria, two independent investigators screened databases and extracted the relevant data respectively, then evaluated the quality of including studies in Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) . (2) Meta-analysis was performed with RevMan 5.3 software. Heterogeneity inspection was done for each study and different effect model included the random effect model and fixed effect model was chose according to the results: of the inspection. At last, the related parameters of the robotic surgery and laparoscopic surgery was analysed. Results (1) Thirteen articles were ultimately included. All of them were written in English and included a total of 1 554 patients, included 739 cases of robotic surgery and 815 cases of laparoscopic surgery. Thirteen articles were all cohort study, four of them were prospective cohort study, while others were retrospective cohort study. After quality assessment, all studies had more than 5 stars and illustrated the higher quality. (2) Meta-analysis results showed: compared with laparoscopic surgery in surgical staging of endometrial cancer, robotic surgery had less estimated blood loss [standard deviation (SD)=-72.31 ml, 95%CI:-107.29 to-37.33, P<0.01], less time for hospital stay (SD=-0.29 days, 95%CI:-0.46 to-0.13, P=0.001), less need for blood transfusion [risk ratio (RR)=0.57, 95%CI: 0.33 to 0.97, P=0.040], and conversion to open surgery (RR=0.41, 95%CI: 0.26 to 0.65, P=0.000), less intraoperative complications (RR=0.43, 95%CI: 0.24 to 0.76, P=0.004) in surgical staging of endometrial cancer. There was no statistically significant difference in aspects of operative time (SD=10.26 minutes, 95% CI:-13.62 to 34.13, P=0.400), postoperative complications (RR=0.87, 95% CI: 0.67 to 1.12, P=0.280), the total number of lymph nodes removed (SD=-0.04, 95% CI:-3.99 to 3.91, P=0.980), the number of pelvic lymph node dissection (SD=0.48, 95%CI:-1.76 to 2.71, P=0.680) and the number of para-aortic lymph node dissection (SD=0.46, 95%CI:-1.42 to 2.34, P=0.630). Conclusions: Compared the robotic surgery with laparoscopic surgery in surgical staging of endometrial cancer, robotic surgery has less estimated blood loss, less need for blood transfusion and conversion to open surgery, less intraoperative complications and other advantages. While its cost is so expensive that restrict clinical application.