Robotic surgical staging of lymphadenectomy during pregnancy – case report

Česká verzia

Authors: Staňková V.; Pilka R.
Authors place of work: Porodnicko-gynekologická klinika LF UP a FN Olomouc
Published in the journal: Ceska Gynekol 2021; 86(6): 387-391
Category: Case Report
doi: https://doi.org/10.48095/cccg2021387

Summary

Objective: We aim to present a case of a 43-year-old patient diagnosed with cervical adenocarcinoma in the 15^th week of pregnancy, who underwent robotically-assisted staging in a laparoscopic pelvic lymphadenectomy. Further therapeutic approach was based on the results of subsequent lymph node histopathologic assessment. Conclusion: In pregnant women with cervical cancer, robot-assisted laparoscopic lymphadenectomy is a method of choice for surgical staging.

Keywords:

robotic surgery – pregnancy – pelvic lymphadenectomy – carcinoma cervicis uteri

Zdroje

1. Smith LH, Danielsen B, Allen ME et al. Cancer associated with obstetric delivery: results of linkage with the California cancer registry. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2003; 189 (4): 1128–1135. doi: 10.1067/s0002-9378 (03) 00537-4.

2. Amant F, Halaska MJ, Fumagalli M et al. Gynecologic cancers in pregnancy: guidelines of a second international consensus meeting. Int J Gynecol Cancer 2014; 24 (3): 394–403. doi: 10.1097/IGC.0000000000000062.

3. Han SN, Verheecke M, Vandenbroucke T et al. Management of gynecological cancers during pregnancy. Curr Oncol Rep 2014; 16 (12): 415. doi: 10.1007/s11912-014-0415-z.

4. Amant F, Berveiller P, Boere IA et al. Gynecologic cancers in pregnancy: guidelines based on a third international consensus meeting. Ann Oncol 2019; 30 (10): 1601–1612. doi: 10.1093/annonc/mdz228.

5. Kanal E, Barkovich AJ, Bell C et al. ACR guidance document for safe MR practices: 2007. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2007; 188 (6): 1447–1474. doi: 10.2214/AJR.06.1616.

6. Shigemi D, Aso S, Matsui H et al. Safety of laparoscopic surgery for benign diseases during pregnancy: a nationwide retrospective cohort study. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 2019; 26 (3): 501–506. doi: 10.1016/j.jmig.2018.06.008.

7. Rojas C, Moroney JW. Robotic surgical staging for cervical cancer diagnosed during pregnancy: immediate versus delayed definitive treatment. Gynecol Oncol Case Rep 2013; 5: 40–42. doi: 10.1016/j.gynor.2013.03.005.

8. Morice P, Uzan C, Gouy S et al. Gynaecological cancers in pregnancy. Lancet 2012; 379 (9815): 558–569. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736 (11) 60829-5.

9. Gadacz TR, Talamini MA. Traditional versus laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Am J Surg 1991; 161 (3): 336–338. doi: 10.1016/0002-9610 (91) 90591-z.

10. Soper NJ, Stockmann PT, Dunnegan DL et al. Laparoscopic cholecystectomy. The new ‚gold standard‘? Arch Surg 1992; 127 (8): 917–921; discussion 921–923. doi: 10.1001/archsurg.1992.0142 0080051008.

11. Curet MJ, Allen D, Josloff RK et al. Laparoscopy during pregnancy. Arch Surg 1996; 131 (5): 546–550; discussion 550–551. doi: 10.1001/ archsurg.1996.01430170092017.

12. Pilka R. Robotic surgery in gynecology. Rozhl Chir 2017; 96 (2): 54–62.