Robotic versus laparoscopic and open surgery in obese endometrial cancer patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis
Abstract
Obesity is a risk factor for endometrial cancer and complicates its surgical. Robotic-assisted laparoscopy, have been proposed to overcome these challenges, but their relative advantages over conventional laparoscopy and laparotomy in obese patients remain uncertain. To compare perioperative outcomes of robotic-assisted, laparoscopic, and open surgical approaches in the management of obese patients with endometrial cancer. A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted according to PRISMA guidelines (PROSPERO registration: CRD420251109990). PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Cochrane Library were searched for studies published between January 2000 and June 2025. Risk of bias was assessed with ROBINS-IV2 Cochrane tool. Eligible studies included obese patients (BMI ≥ 30 kg/m²) undergoing hysterectomy for endometrial cancer, directly comparing robotics with laparoscopic or open approaches. Primary outcomes were operative time, estimated blood loss, hospital stay, and conversion to laparotomy; secondary outcomes included intraoperative and postoperative complications. Data were synthesized using random-effects meta-analysis models. Twenty-one studies involving 4,865 obese patients were included. Robotic surgery was associated with a shorter hospital stay compared to laparoscopy (1.9 vs. 3.8 days) and laparotomy (1.9 vs. 4.3 days), and with lower blood loss compared to laparotomy (97 vs. 337 mL). Operative time was longer with robotics (183 min) compared to laparoscopy (147 min)…
How strong is the evidence?
Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 4,865 participants or records.
Read the paper
Related studies
- Global, regional, and national burden of hepatitis B, 1990–2019: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019
- A meta‐analysis of anal cancer incidence by risk group: Toward a unified anal cancer risk scale
- Global fertility in 204 countries and territories, 1950–2021, with forecasts to 2100: a comprehensive demographic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2021
- Exercise interventions in Alzheimer's disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
- Prognostic Significance of Carbonic Anhydrase IX Expression in Cancer Patients: A Meta-Analysis
- Glucocorticoid Resistance: Is It a Requisite for Increased Cytokine Production in Depression? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Go deeper in Evidence Hub
Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.