Robotic single site versus robotic multiport hysterectomy in endometrial cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Abstract Objective This meta-analysis aims to compare the safety and efficacy of robotic single-site hysterectomy (RSSH) with robotic multiport hysterectomy (RMPH) in treating endometrial cancer. Methods We conducted a comprehensive literature search across several databases, including PubMed, the C...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
BMC
2025-03-01
|
| Series: | BMC Cancer |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.1186/s12885-025-13968-6 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Summary: | Abstract Objective This meta-analysis aims to compare the safety and efficacy of robotic single-site hysterectomy (RSSH) with robotic multiport hysterectomy (RMPH) in treating endometrial cancer. Methods We conducted a comprehensive literature search across several databases, including PubMed, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Embase, the Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Wan Fang, and the Chinese Science and Technology Journal Full Text Database (VIP). The search covered literature from inception until October 17, 2024. The primary outcomes included intraoperative complications, postoperative complications, postoperative pain scores, and satisfaction with cosmetic outcomes. The secondary outcomes included operative time (min), estimated blood loss (ml), hemoglobin drop, blood transfusion, conversion, postoperative hospital stay, lymph nodes harvested, sentinel lymph node identification, recurrence, and mortality during follow-up. Data analysis was performed using random-effects or fixed-effects models, calculating combined risk ratios (RR), weighted mean difference (WMD), and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI). Results Five studies describing a total of 448 patients were retained and included for this meta-analysis. No significant differences were found between RSSH and RMPH regarding intraoperative complications, postoperative complications, and postoperative pain scores. There were also no differences in terms of operation time, estimated blood loss, hemoglobin drop, blood transfusion, conversion, postoperative hospital stay, lymph nodes harvested, and sentinel lymph node identification. Conclusion This systematic review and meta-analysis provides evidence that RSSH is effective and safe for the treatment of endometrial cancer, as it is generally equivalent to RMPH regarding perioperative outcomes. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1471-2407 |