Comparative outcomes between robotic and abdominal radical hysterectomy for IB1 cervical cancer: Results from a single high volume institution

Abstract Objective To compare the perioperative morbidity and survival between abdominal radical hysterectomy (ARH) and robotic radical hysterectomy (RRH). Methods A retrospective cohort of patients undergoing radical hysterectomy for cervical cancer from 2010 to 2016 was identified. Patients with stage IB1 cervical cancer were included and were grouped by ARH vs. RRH. Tumor characteristics, perioperative complications, recurrence rate, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS) were compared between groups. Results 105 patients were identified; 56 underwent ARH and 49 underwent RRH. Those who had ARH were more likely to have lesions that were ≥2 cm (62% vs. 39%, p  = 0.02) and that were higher grade ( p  = 0.048). Other tumor characteristics were similar between groups. There was no difference in perioperative complication rates between groups. Additionally, there were no differences in recurrence risk (RR) (14% vs. 24%, p  = 0.22), progression-free survival (PFS) ( p  = 0.28), or overall survival (OS) ( p  = 0.16). However, in those with tumors ≥2 cm there was a higher risk of recurrence in the overall cohort (30% vs. 8%, p  = 0.006), and a shorter PFS in the RRH group (HR 0.31, p  = 0.04). On multivariate analysis patients that underwent ARH or had tumors  p  = 0.04; HR 0.175, p  = 0.002) and death (HR 0.21, p  = 0.029; HR 0.15, p  = 0.02). Conclusion Perioperative morbidity was similar between those undergoing ARH vs. RRH for IB1 cervical cancer. Patients with tumors ≥ 2 cm undergoing RRH had a shorter PFS compared to ARH. On multivariate analysis, RRH and tumor size ≥ 2 cm were independently associated with recurrence and death in this population.