nach oben

Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics

Erschienen in:

Open Access 17.11.2020 | Gynecologic Oncology

Survey of current practices and opinions of German Society of Gynecologic Endoscopy members regarding the treatment of ovarian neoplasia by robotic surgery

verfasst von: J. S. M. Zimmermann, J. C. Radosa, M. P. Radosa, P. Sklavounos, P. A. Schweitzer, E. F. Solomayer

Erschienen in: Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics | Ausgabe 5/2021

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Purpose

As data on this topic are sparse and contradictory, we aimed to ascertain the opinions of the members of the German Society of Gynecologic Endoscopy (AGE) regarding the use of robotic surgery in the treatment of ovarian malignancies.

Methods

In 2015, an anonymous questionnaire was sent to AGE members to assess their views on the treatment of ovarian malignancies by robotic surgery according to T stage and the current treatment practices in their facilities.

Results

Of the 228 respondents, 132 (58%) were fellows or attending physicians and 156 (68%) worked at university hospitals or tertiary referral centers. Most [n = 218 (96%)] respondents reported treating < 10% of their patients using robotic surgery. Respondents felt that T1 and borderline ovarian tumors, but not T2 (51%) or T3/4 (76%) tumors, should and could be treated by robot surgery. 162 (71%) respondents considered the currently available data on this subject to be insufficient, and 42% indicated their willingness to participate in clinical studies on the applicability of robotic surgery to the treatment of T1/2 ovarian tumors.

Conclusion

The majority of AGE members surveyed considered robotic surgery to be an option for the treatment of T1 ovarian malignancies and borderline ovarian tumors. However, prospective randomized studies are needed to determine the relevance of robotic surgery in this context.

Siegel RL, Miller KD, Jemal A (2016) Cancer statistics. CA Cancer J Clin 66:7–30. https://doi.org/10.3322/caac.21442CrossRefPubMed

Robert Koch-Institut (Hrsg) und die Gesellschaft der epidemiologischen Krebsregister in Deutschland e.V. (Hrsg) (2020) Krebs in Deutschland 2015/2016. 12. Ausgabe. Im Internet: www.krebsdaten.de/Krebs/DE/Content/Publikationen/Krebs_in_Deutschland/kid_2019/krebs_in_deutschland_2019.pdf?__blob=publicationFile. Accessed 06 Jan 2020. https://doi.org/10.25646/5977

Bristow RE, Tomacruz SR, Armstrong DK et al (2002) Survival effect of maximal cytoreductive surgery for advanced ovarian carcinoma during the platinum era: a meta-analysis. J Clin Oncol 20:1248–1259. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2002.20.5.1248CrossRefPubMed

Elattar A, Bryant A, Winter-Roach BA et al (2011) Optimal primary surgical treatment for advanced epithelial ovarian cancer. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 10:CD007565. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD007565.pub2CrossRef

Cho JE, Liu C, Gossner G et al (2009) Laparoscopy and gynecologic oncology. Clin Obstet Gynelcol 52:313–326. https://doi.org/10.1097/GRF.0b013e3181b088d2CrossRef

Jernigan AM, Auer M, Fader AN et al (2012) Minimally invasive surgery in gynecologic oncology: a review of modalities and the literature. Womens Health (Lond) 8:239–250. https://doi.org/10.2217/whe.12.13CrossRef

Park HJ, Kim DW, Yim GW et al (2013) Staging laparoscopy for the management of early stage ovarian cancer: a meta-analysis. Am J Obstet Gynecol 209(58):e1-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2013.04.013CrossRef

Sjovall K, Nilsson B, Einhorn N (1994) Different types of rupture of the tumor capsule and the impact of survival in early ovarian carcinoma. Int J Gynecol Cancer 4:333–336. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1525-1438.1994.04050333.xCrossRefPubMed

Zivanovic O, Sonoda Y, Diaz JP et al (2008) The rate of port-site metastases after 2251 laparoscopic procedures in women with underlying malignant disease. Gynecol Oncol 111:431–437. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ygyno.2008.08.024CrossRefPubMed

10.

Deutsche Krebsgesellschaft, Deutsche Krebshilfe, AWMF (2020) Leitlinienprogramm Onkologie S3-Leitlinie Diagnostik, Therapie und Nachsorge maligner Ovarialtumoren, Langversion 1.0, Version 4.01- November 2019. Im Internet: www.leitlinienprogramm-onkologie.de/fileadmin/user_upload/Downloads/Leitlinien/Ovarialkarzinom/Version_4/LL_Ovarialkarzinom_Langversion_4.01.pdf. Accessed 06 Jan 2020

11.

Fagotti A, Fanfani F, Vizzielli G et al (2010) Should laparoscopy be included in the work-up of advanced ovarian cancer patients attempting interval debulking surgery? Gynecol Oncol 116:72–77. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ygyno.2009.09.015CrossRefPubMed

12.

Fagotti A, Perelli F, Pedone L et al (2016) Current recommendations for minimally invasive surgical staging in ovarian cancer. Curr Treat Options Oncol 17:3. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11864-015-0379-8CrossRefPubMed

13.

Park JY, Kim DY, Suh DS et al (2008) Comparison of laparoscopy and laparotomy in surgical staging of early-stage ovarian and fallopian tubal cancer. Ann Surg Oncol 15:2012–2019. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-008-9893-2CrossRefPubMed

14.

Radosa JC, Radosa MP, Schweitzer PA et al (2018) Report of the survey on current opinions and practice of German Society for Gynecologic Endoscopy (AGE) members regarding the laparoscopic treatment of ovarian malignancies. Arch Gynecol Obstet 297:1255–1264. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-018-4709-5CrossRefPubMed

15.

Brierley J, Gospodarowicz MK, Wittekind C (2017) TNM classification of malignant tumours, 8th edn. Wiley, Chichester, West Sussex, Hoboken. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780471420194CrossRef

16.

Lucidi A, Chiantera V, Gallotta V et al (2017) Role of robotic surgery in ovarian malignancy. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol 45:74–82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bpobgyn.2017.05.005CrossRefPubMed

17.

Bellia A, Vitale SG, Laganà AS et al (2016) Feasibility and surgical outcomes of conventional and robot-assisted laparoscopy for early-stage ovarian cancer: a retrospective, multicenter analysis. Arch Gynecol Obstet 294:615–622. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-016-4087-9CrossRefPubMed

18.

Yao Y, Li X, Yang Y et al (2015) Robotic surgery in the management of early ovarian malignancy tumors. Zhonghua Fu Chan Ke Za Zhi 50:603–607PubMed

19.

Gallotta V, Cicero C, Conte C et al (2017) Robotic versus laparoscopic staging for early ovarian cancer: a case-matched control study. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 24:293–298. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmig.2016.11.004CrossRefPubMed

20.

Minig L, Padilla Iserte P, Zorrero C et al (2016) Robotic surgery in women with ovarian cancer: surgical technique and evidence of clinical outcomes. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 23:309–316. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmig.2015.10.014CrossRefPubMed

21.

Mäenpää MM, Nieminen K, Tomás El et al (2016) Robotic-assisted vs traditional laparoscopic surgery for endometrial cancer: a randomized controlled trial. Am J Obstet Gynecol 215:588.e1-588.e7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2016.06.005CrossRef

22.

El Khouly NI, Barr RL, Kim BB et al (2014) Comparison of robotic-assisted and conventional laparoscopy in the management of adnexal masses. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 21:1071–1074. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmig.2014.05.007CrossRefPubMed

23.

Nezhat FR, Finger TN, Vetere P et al (2014) Comparison of perioperative outcomes and complication rates between conventional versus robotic-assisted laparoscopy in the evaluation and management of early, advanced, and recurrent stage ovarian, fallopian tube, and primary peritoneal cancer. Int J Gynecol Cancer 24:600–607. https://doi.org/10.1097/IGC.0000000000000096CrossRefPubMed

24.

de la Cuesta SR, Goff BA, Fuller AF Jr et al (1994) Prognostic importance of intraoperative rupture of malignant ovarian epithelial neoplasms. Obstet Gynecol 84:1–7

25.

Bakkum-Gamez JN, Richardson DL, Seamon LG et al (2009) Influence of intraoperative capsule rupture on outcomes in stage I epithelial ovarian cancer. Obstet Gynecol 113:11–17. https://doi.org/10.1097/AOG.0b013e3181917a0cCrossRefPubMed

26.

Kim HS, Ahn JH, Chung HH et al (2013) Impact of intraoperative rupture of the ovarian capsule on prognosis in patients with early-stage epithelial ovarian cancer: a meta-analysis. Eur J Surg Oncol 39:279–289. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejso.2012.12.003CrossRefPubMed

27.

Wildbrett P, Oh A, Naundorf D et al (2003) Impact of laparoscopic gases on peritoneal microenvironment and essential parameters of cell function. Surg Endosc 17:78–82CrossRefPubMed

28.

Smidt VJ, Singh DM, Hurteau JA et al (2001) Effect of carbon dioxide on human ovarian carcinoma cell growth. Am J Obstet Gynecol 185:1314–1317CrossRefPubMed

29.

Lee M, Kim SW, Paek J et al (2011) Comparisons of surgical outcomes, complications, and costs between laparotomy and laparoscopy in early-stage ovarian cancer. Int Gynecol Cancer 21:251–256. https://doi.org/10.1097/IGC.0b013e318208c71cCrossRef

30.

Ghezzi F, Malzoni M, Vizza E et al (2012) Laparoscopic staging of early ovarian cancer: results of a multi-institutional cohort study. Ann Surg Oncol 19:1589–1594. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-011-2138-9CrossRefPubMed

31.

Possover M, Krause N, Plaul K et al (1998) Laparoscopic para-aortic and pelvic lymphadenectomy: experience with 150 patients and review of the literature. Gynecol Oncol 71:19–28CrossRefPubMed

32.

Seror J, Bats AS, Bensaïd C et al (2015) Risk of port site metastases in pelvic cancers after robotic surgery. Eur J Surg Oncol 41:599–603. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejso.2015.01.003CrossRefPubMed

33.

Rindos N, Curry CL, Tabbarah R et al (2014) Port-site metastases after robotic surgery for gynecologic malignancy. J Soc Lap Surg 18:66–70. https://doi.org/10.4293/108680813X13693422519271CrossRef

34.

Ramirez PT, Wolf JK, Levenback C (2003) Laparoscopic port-site metastases: etiology and prevention. Gynecol Oncol 91:179–189CrossRefPubMed

35.

Kristensen SE, Mosgaard BJ, Rosendahl M et al (2017) Robot-assisted surgery in gynecological oncology: current status and controversies on patient benefits, cost and surgeon conditions - a systematic review. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 963:274–285. https://doi.org/10.1111/aogs.13084CrossRef

36.

Alkatout I, Mettler L, Maass N et al (2016) Robotic surgery in gynecology. J Turk Ger Gynecol Assoc 17:224–232. https://doi.org/10.5152/jtgga.2016.16187CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

37.

https://www.aerztezeitung.de/Medizin/Zitterfreies-Operieren-mit-dem-Roboter-253634.html. Accessed 6 Jan 2020

38.

Challacombe BJ, Khan MS, Murphy D et al (2006) The history of robotics in urology. World J Urol 24:120–127. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-006-0067-1CrossRefPubMed

39.

Chen CH, Chiu LH, Chen HH et al (2016) Comparison of robotic approach, laparoscopic approach and laparotomy in treating epithelial ovarian cancer. Int J Med Robot 12:268–275. https://doi.org/10.1002/rcs.1655CrossRefPubMed

40.

Alkatout I, Holthaus B, Wedel T et al (2018) Entwicklung der minimal-invasiven Chirurgie in der Gynäkologie und Überwindung assoziativer Herausforderungen. Gynäkologe 51:737–743. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00129-018-4292-7CrossRef

41.

Yim GW, Kim YT (2012) Robotic surgery in gynecologic cancer. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol 24:14–23. https://doi.org/10.1097/GCO.0b013e32834daebcCrossRefPubMed

42.

Zanagnolo V, Garbi A, Achilarre MT et al (2017) Robot-assisted surgery in gynecologic cancers. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 24:379–396. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmig.2017.01.006CrossRefPubMed

43.

Armstrong DK, Alvarez RD, Bakkum-Gamez JN (2019) NCCN guidelines insights: Ovarian Cancer, Version 1. 2019. J Natl Compr Canc Netw 17:896–909. https://doi.org/10.6004/jnccn.2019.0039CrossRefPubMed

44.

Feuer GA, Lakhi N, Barker J (2013) Perioperative and clinical outcomes in the management of epithelial ovarian cancer using a robotic or abdominal approach. Gynecol Oncol 131:520–524. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ygyno.2013.09.022CrossRefPubMed

45.

Magrina JF, Zanagnolo V, Noble BN (2011) Robotic approach for ovarian cancer: perioperative and survival results and comparison with laparoscopy and laparotomy. Gynecol Oncol 121:100–105. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ygyno.2010.11.045CrossRefPubMed

46.

Mabrouk M, Frumovitz M, Greer M et al (2009) Trends in laparoscopic and robotic surgery among gynecologic oncologists: a survey update. Gynecol Oncol 112:501–505. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ygyno.2008.11.037CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

47.

Conrad LB, Ramirez PT, Burke W et al (2015) Role of minimally invasive surgery in gynecologic oncology: An updated survey of members of the society of gynecologic oncology. Int J Gynecol Cancer 25:1121–1127. https://doi.org/10.1097/IGC.0000000000000450CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Titel: Survey of current practices and opinions of German Society of Gynecologic Endoscopy members regarding the treatment of ovarian neoplasia by robotic surgery
verfasst von: J. S. M. Zimmermann
J. C. Radosa
M. P. Radosa
P. Sklavounos
P. A. Schweitzer
E. F. Solomayer
Publikationsdatum: 17.11.2020
Verlag: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Erschienen in: Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics / Ausgabe 5/2021
Print ISSN: 0932-0067
Elektronische ISSN: 1432-0711
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-020-05876-w

Update Gynäkologie

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert – ganz bequem per eMail.

Newsletter bestellen

Springer Medizin

Survey of current practices and opinions of German Society of Gynecologic Endoscopy members regarding the treatment of ovarian neoplasia by robotic surgery