Skip to content

Perioperative Morbidity in Gyneco-oncology According to the Procedure : Coelioscopy Versus Robot-assisted Coelioscopy

Assessment of Perioperative Morbidity in Gyneco-oncology According to the Surgical Approach : Coelioscopy Versus Robot-assisted Coelioscopy

Status
Completed
Phases
Unknown
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT01247779
Acronym
ROBO-GYN
Enrollment
386
Registered
2010-11-24
Start date
2010-12-01
Completion date
2017-11-01
Last updated
2026-03-13

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Cervical Cancer, Ovarian Cancer, Uterus Cancer

Keywords

gynecology, oncology, coelioscopy, robot, morbidity

Brief summary

The purpose of this study is to compare perioperative morbidity of coelioscopy versus robot-assisted coelioscopy in cervical cancer, uterus cancer and ovarian cancer.

Detailed description

Laparoscopic surgery, also called minimally invasive surgery (MIS), is a surgical method less invasive than classical laparoscopic open procedure. Particularly, MIS is used for resection of some gynecological cancer such as endometrial cancer, cervical cancer or ovarian cancer. Several studies demonstrated that MIS induce less surgical complications (bleeding, infections, post-operative pains...), shorter hospitalization time, earlier recovery of activity and better quality of life than laparoscopic open procedure. However, MIS is the selected method in only 9 to 25 % of gynecologic cancer surgery in France. This is likely due to the longer learning curve of MIS compared to laparoscopic open procedure. In 2001 the FDA allowed the use of robot assisted laparoscopic surgery (RALS). This technique adds some advantage to laparoscopic surgery. Indeed, surgeon operates with better precision while seated comfortably at a computer console viewing a 3-D image of the surgical field. Moreover learning curve of RALS is shorter than MIS. Comparative studies between RALS and MIS demonstrate an equivalence of these techniques for operation length and bleeding. However for surgery linked complications and time for recovery of activity, RALS had better results than MIS. Despite its expensive cost, RALS is now commonly used in North America (90% of prostatectomy and 40% of cancer linked hysterectomy). However RALS need to be evaluated in a randomized clinical trial before it's acceptation in gyneco-oncology in France. Thus, the purpose of the ROBOGYN clinical trial is to compare clinical benefit of RALS and MIS in a randomized study for patients with cancer of cervix, uterus or ovary.

Interventions

PROCEDUREgynecologic surgery - standard coelioscopy

lymphadenectomy; hysterectomy; nerve sparing; enlarged trachelectomy; omentectomy; appendicectomy; pelvectomy

PROCEDUREgynecologic surgery - robot assisted coelioscopy

lymphadenectomy; hysterectomy; nerve sparing; enlarged trachelectomy; omentectomy; appendicectomy; pelvectomy

Sponsors

Centre Oscar Lambret
Lead SponsorOTHER
CRG : Groupe Francophone de Chirurgie Robotique en Gynécologie
CollaboratorUNKNOWN
National Cancer Institute, France
CollaboratorOTHER_GOV

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
NONE

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
FEMALE
Age
18 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

* patient with uterus cancer depending on hysterectomy ± pelvic lymphadenectomy or a restadification * patient with cervical cancer depending on enlarged colpo-hysterectomy ± pelvic lymphadenectomy or a surgery after concomitant radiochemotherapy, or lombo aortic lymphadenectomy for a locally advanced cancer, or a restadification * patient with cervical cancer depending on a restadification * patient aged over 18 years * previous antitumor treatment allowed but necessarily disrupted 20 days before inclusion * WHO score equal or inferior to 3 * cirrhosis-related Child-Pugh score under or equal to A7 are allowed * life expectancy equal or superior to 12 weeks * patient affiliated to health insurance * dated and signed informed consent

Exclusion criteria

* metastatic disease * pregnant or breastfeeding woman * patient unable to proceed follow-up visit, because of geographic, social or mental reasons

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Perioperative morbidity at six monthssix months after surgeryTo estimate the rate of complications within the first six months after surgery, according to the Clavien-Dindo and NCI CTCAE-v4.0 grading scales

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Anesthesic and ventilator parametersevery 30 min during the surgeryDescription of anesthesic and ventilator parameters
Post-operative analgesiaat 24h, 48h after sugery and until dischargecollect of antalgic treatments
Surgeon's ergonomyevery hour during surgery (Borg scale), and at the end of intervention (NASA-TLX scale)according to Borg and NASA-TLX scales
Patient-reported survey of patient healthuntil 2 years after surgery36-item short form health Survey (SF36) : Scoring is a two-step process. First, numeric values of all items are recoded per the scoring key (for example, values are 0/100, or 0/25/50/75/100 depending the items). All items are scored so that a high score defines a more favorable health state. Each item is scored on a 0 to 100 range so that the lowest and highest possible scores are 0 and 100, respectively. Scores represent the percentage of total possible score achieved. In step 2, items in the same scale are averaged together to create the 8 scale scores: physical functioning, Role functioning/physical, Role functioning/emotional, Energy/fatigue, Emotional well-being, Social functioning, Pain, General health, Health change. Scale scores represent the average for all items in the scale that the respondent answered.
Description of surgical proceduresduring surgeryoperative time (overall intervention, incision or "skin-to-skin", robot).
Progression-free survivaluntil 2 years after surgerydelay between the date of randomization and the date of the following event: local relapse, regional relapse, metastasis or death.
Anatomopathologyduring surgeryrate of exeresis with histologically healthy resection margins (R0), number of lymph nodes removed.

Countries

France

Contacts

PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATORFabrice NARDUCCI, MD

Centre Oscar Lambret, Lille

STUDY_DIRECTOREric LAMBAUDIE, MD

Institut Paoli-Calmettes

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Mar 14, 2026