TY - JOUR T1 - Surgical and Oncological Outcome of Robotic Surgery Compared With Laparoscopic and Abdominal Surgery in the Management of Locally Advanced Cervical Cancer After Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy JF - International Journal of Gynecologic Cancer JO - Int J Gynecol Cancer SP - 539 LP - 546 DO - 10.1097/IGC.0000000000000646 VL - 26 IS - 3 AU - Giacomo Corrado AU - Giuseppe Cutillo AU - Maria Saltari AU - Emanuela Mancini AU - Stefano Sindico AU - Patrizia Vici AU - Domenico Sergi AU - Isabella Sperduti AU - Lodovico Patrizi AU - Giulia Pomati AU - Ermelinda Baiocco AU - Enrico Vizza Y1 - 2016/03/01 UR - http://ijgc.bmj.com/content/26/3/539.abstract N2 - Objective The primary aim is to evaluate the surgical and oncological outcome of robotic radical hysterectomy (RRH) plus pelvic lymphadenectomy in locally advanced cervical cancer (LACC) after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT). The secondary aim is to compare the surgical and oncological results of RRH after NACT with a historical cohort of patients undergoing laparoscopic radical hysterectomy or abdominal radical hysterectomy plus pelvic lymphadenectomy for LACC after NACT.Methods We enrolled a total of 41 patients in this study with LACC undergoing RRH, who achieved a clinical partial or complete response to NACT. The surgical and oncological outcomes of 2 historical groups were compared: the laparoscopic group (41 patients) with the laparotomic group (43 patients).Results The median estimated blood loss, operative time, and length of hospital stay were statistically significant and in favor of the robotic group. No conversion to laparotomy in the robotic group was necessary. There were no significant differences between the 3-year overall survival and disease-free survival rates in the minimally invasive groups; nevertheless, the robotic group showed the same recurrence rate of laparoscopic in a short-interval follow-up.Conclusions The robotic approach could be considered a feasible and safe alternative to other surgical options. Multicenter randomized clinical trials with longer follow-ups are necessary to evaluate the overall oncologic outcomes of this procedure. ER -