Robot-Assisted Laparoscopic Surgery for Hysterectomy: A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.37287/ijghr.v7i6.556Keywords:
gynecology, hysterectomy, randomized controlled trial, robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery, systematic reviewAbstract
Robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery (RALS) has emerged as an advancement in minimally invasive gynecology, particularly in hysterectomy for benign and oncologic indications. Compared with laparoscopy and laparotomy, RALS offers enhanced visualization, dexterity, and precision, though concerns remain regarding cost, operative time, and outcomes. This systematic review aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of RALS compared with conventional laparoscopy or laparotomy for hysterectomy, focusing on perioperative, oncologic, and patient-centered outcomes. Method: The review followed PRISMA 2020 guidelines. A database search of PubMed, ScienceDirect, and Taylor & Francis identified 752 records. After removal of duplicates and screening, 70 full-text articles were assessed, and 4 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) met the eligibility criteria and were included. Study selection involved independent screening by two reviewers, with disagreements resolved by consensus. Data extraction used a standardized template capturing study design, population characteristics, interventions, comparators, and outcomes. Given heterogeneity across studies, a narrative synthesis approach was applied. Four RCTs were included, encompassing benign hysterectomy, low-grade and high-risk endometrial cancer, and early-stage cervical cancer. RALS showed lower conversion rates and comparable complications. Operative times were longer, but perioperative outcomes were favorable. Long-term follow-up suggested improved survival in endometrial cancer, though findings remain inconsistent. Patient-reported outcomes were generally equivalent. RALS is a safe and effective alternative with selective advantages, though longer operative time and higher costs limit adoption. Further large-scale RCTs and cost-effectiveness studies are needed.
References
Bankar, G.R., Keoliya, A., (2022). Robot-Assisted Surgery in Gynecology. Cureus.
Chen, C., Zhang, M., Tang, J., Pu, K., (2024). Cost-effectiveness of robotic surgery compared to conventional laparoscopy for the management of early-stage cervical cancer: a model-based economic evaluation in China. BMJ Open 14.
Deimling, T.A., Eldridge, J.L., Riley, K.A., Kunselman, A.R., Harkins, G.J., (2016). Randomized controlled trial comparing operative times between standard and robot-assisted laparoscopic hysterectomy. International Journal of Gynecology and Obstetrics 136, 64–69.
Falconer, H., Palsdottir, K., Stalberg, K., Dahm-Kähler, P., Ottander, U., Lundin, E.S., Wijk, L., Kimmig, R., Jensen, P.T., Eriksson, A.G.Z., Mäenpää, J., Persson, J., Salehi, S., (2019). Robot-assisted approach to cervical cancer (RACC): An international multi-center, open-label randomized controlled trial. International Journal of Gynecological Cancer 29, 1072–1076.
Ferrier, C., Le Gac, M., Kolanska, K., Boudy, A.-S., Dabi, Y., Touboul, C., Bendifallah, S., Daraï, E., (2022). Comparison of robot-assisted and conventional laparoscopy for colorectal surgery for endometriosis: A prospective cohort study. Int J Med Robot 18.
Kivekäs, E., Staff, S., Huhtala, H.S.A., Mäenpää, J.U., Nieminen, K., Tomás, E.I., Mäenpää, M.M., (2025). Robotic-assisted versus conventional laparoscopic surgery for endometrial cancer: long-term results of a randomized controlled trial. Am J Obstet Gynecol 232, 304.e1-304.e8.
Marchand, G., Taher Masoud, A., Abdelsattar, A., King, A., Brazil, G., Ulibarri, H., Parise, J., Arroyo, A., Coriell, C., Goetz, S., Moir, C., Baruelo, G., Govindan, M., (2023). Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of laparoscopic radical hysterectomy vs. Robotic assisted radical hysterectomy for early stage cervical cancer. European Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology and Reproductive Biology.
Page, M.J., McKenzie, J.E., Bossuyt, P.M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T.C., Mulrow, C.D., Shamseer, L., Tetzlaff, J.M., Akl, E.A., Brennan, S.E., Chou, R., Glanville, J., Grimshaw, J.M., Hróbjartsson, A., Lalu, M.M., Li, T., Loder, E.W., Mayo-Wilson, E., McDonald, S., McGuinness, L.A., Stewart, L.A., Thomas, J., Tricco, A.C., Welch, V.A., Whiting, P., Moher, D., (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. The BMJ.
Paraiso, M.F.R., Ridgeway, B., Park, A.J., Jelovsek, J.E., Barber, M.D., Falcone, T., Einarsson, J.I., (2013). A randomized trial comparing conventional and robotically assisted total laparoscopic hysterectomy. Am J Obstet Gynecol 208, 368.e1-368.e7.
Pavone, M., Baroni, A., Campolo, F., Goglia, M., Raimondo, D., Carcagnì, A., Akladios, C., Marescaux, J., Fanfani, F., Scambia, G., Ianieri, M.M., (2024). Robotic assisted versus laparoscopic surgery for deep endometriosis: a meta-analysis of current evidence. J Robot Surg.
Salehi, S., Brandberg, Y., Åvall-Lundqvist, E., Suzuki, C., Johansson, H., Legerstam, B., Falconer, H., (2018). Long-term quality of life after comprehensive surgical staging of high-risk endometrial cancer–results from the RASHEC trial. Acta Oncol (Madr) 57, 1671–1676.
Takmaz, Ö., Güngör, M., (2020). Robotic versus laparoscopic hysterectomy; comparison of early surgical outcomes. Journal of the Turkish German Gynecology Association 21, 260–264.
Weinberg, L., Rao, S., Escobar, P.F., (2011). Robotic Surgery in Gynecology: An Updated Systematic Review. Obstet Gynecol Int 2011, 1–29.
Zhao, L., Xie, X., Zhang, N., Xu, J., Yang, W., Fan, W., Meng, Y., Li, L., Gu, C., (2025). Surgical outcomes of robotic hysterectomy for large uterus weighing more than 1000 g: a retrospective study from a high-volume center. J Robot Surg 19.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Indonesian Journal of Global Health Research
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
