Robotic surgery has become an increasingly common option for treating cancers in the abdomen and pelvis. However, whether robotic surgery leads to better cancer-related outcomes than laparoscopic (keyhole) surgery or open surgery is still uncertain. Results may differ across cancer types, and factors such as how complex the surgery is and how experienced the surgeon is may also influence the outcome.
This retrospective cohort study examined adults who underwent curative-intent surgery for one of seven abdominopelvic cancers (pancreatic, gastric, rectal, cervical, endometrial, kidney, or prostate cancer) at a large tertiary hospital in Seoul, South Korea, between January 2012 and December 2021. Patients were classified into three groups according to the surgical approach they received: open, laparoscopic, or robotic surgery.
The main outcome was 1-year disease-free survival, defined as the time from surgery to the first occurrence of cancer recurrence, distant metastasis, or death from any cause. Additional outcomes included 1-year mortality, overall mortality during follow-up, major postoperative complications, acute kidney injury, and length of hospital stay.
To reduce differences between groups that might affect the comparison, the study used a statistical method called propensity score overlap weighting. Additional analyses adjusted for surgical complexity, surgeon experience including robotic learning curve, and pathological cancer stage to isolate the effect of the surgical platform itself.
The purpose of this study was to evaluate whether the association between surgical approach and early oncologic and perioperative outcomes differed across the seven cancer types, and whether any observed advantage of the robotic platform remained after accounting for these factors.