Concurrent Learning Curves of 3-Dimensional and Robotic-Assisted Laparoscopic Radical Hysterectomy for Early-Stage Cervical Cancer Using 2-Dimensional Laparoscopic Radical Hysterectomy as a Benchmark: A Single Surgeon’s Experience

BACKGROUND: For early-stage cervical cancers, radical hysterectomy (RH) with pelvic lymphadenectomy has been the standard care. This study compared the learning curves and intra-, peri-, and post-operative outcomes for 3-dimensional laparoscopic RH (3D-LRH) and robotic-assisted (RA)-LRH by a surgeon highly skilled in 2-dimensional (2D)-LRH for treatment of early-stage cervical cancer. MATERIAL/METHODS: Two hundred and thirty-nine patients with early-stage cervical cancer (FIGO stage: Ia2–IIa2) admitted to Shanghai Obstetrics and Gynecology Hospital, Fudan University were recruited into this prospective study: 54, 85, and 100 patients underwent 2D-, 3D-, and RA-LRH, respectively and were followed up. Patients’ demographic, clinical, and operative information was retrieved and compared. CUSUM (cumulative summation) analysis using a benchmark derived from previously performed 2D-LRHs. RESULTS: Both 3D- and RA-LRH had a steep learning curve. 3D-LRH was superior to 2D- and RA-LRH in terms of significantly shorter operating time. For all approaches, the operating time was associated with the uterus size of the patient and was not affected by other parameters. All approaches of LRH yielded comparable radicality and operative results other than operative time. CONCLUSIONS: Both 3D- and RA-LRH approaches had similar radicality, and intra-operative and post-operative complication rates, however, 3D-LRH had the shortest operating time and lowest amount of blood loss. After reaching proficiency, RA-LRH had comparable operating time with that of 2D-LRH, and might be even shorter in cases where surgeon has acquired more experience. In countries where labor costs are low; 3D-LRH might be preferable to 2D- and RA-LRH for early-stage cervical cancer.