Obesity and perioperative outcomes of robotic-assisted surgery for endometrial cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Jianxue Gong, Min Zhang, Yanrong Chen et al.
✦ AI-curated · Sources linked
In 30 seconds
This systematic review and meta-analysis compared perioperative outcomes after robotic-assisted surgery for endometrial cancer in patients classified as obese or non-obese by the original studies. It included eight retrospective studies with 1,879 patients; obesity was defined as BMI ≥ 30 kg/m², and the data were not limited to class I–II obesity. No statistically significant differences were detected in operative time, estimated blood loss, length of stay, or pooled complications. For operative time, the mean difference was - 9.02 min (95% CI, - 21.25 to 3.20; p = 0.15). The findings do not establish equivalent safety.
Key findings
- Eight retrospective studies involving 1,879 patients contributed data to the meta-analysis.
- Operative time did not differ significantly between groups (MD, - 9.02 min; 95% CI, - 21.25 to 3.20; p = 0.15).
- Estimated blood loss and length of stay showed no statistically significant differences; pooled complication estimates were also nonsignificant.
Why it matters
The findings suggest that, in the included studies, obesity was not associated with statistically significant differences in the assessed perioperative outcomes of robotic-assisted surgery for endometrial cancer. However, nonsignificant results should not be interpreted as proof of equivalent safety. The review also does not establish how robotic surgery compares with other surgical approaches.
What to keep in mind
All included studies were retrospective, and estimates were imprecise and potentially confounded. Obesity categories were based on the original reports, and the data were not restricted to BMI < 40 kg/m².