Laparoscopic surgery vs laparotomy for early stage endometrial cancer: long-term data of a randomized controlled trial

Comparison of survival and complications between minimally invasive and open staging surgeries in non-endometrioid endometrial cancer

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to compare survival and complications between minimally invasive surgery and open surgery and evaluate related risk factors in patients with non-endometrioid endometrial cancer.

METHODS

Clinicopathologic characteristics; survival outcomes; complications; and prognostic factors associated with progression-free survival and overall survival were compared among patients with non-endometrioid endometrial cancer who underwent primary staging surgery using laparoscopic, robotic, or open abdominal surgery (2004-2017).

RESULTS

In total, 91 patients were included: 41 and 50 underwent minimally invasive surgery and open surgery, respectively. The minimally invasive surgery and open surgery groups showed similar progression-free survival (5-year progression-free survival rate, 58.7 % vs. 58.5 %; P = .925) and overall survival (5-year overall survival rate, 73.6 % vs. 80.3 %; P = .834). Intraoperative (7.2 % vs. 6.0 %; P = .111) and postoperative surgical complications (14.6 % vs. 26.0 %; P = .165) were similar between the groups. However, blood loss was lower (mean, 305.1 vs. 561.2 ml, P < .001) and hospital stay was shorter (mean, 8.2 vs. 15.4 days, P < .001) in the minimally invasive surgery group. Using multivariate analysis, lymphovascular space invasion was identified as poor prognostic factor for progression-free survival (adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 3.054; 95 % confidence interval [CI], 1.521-6.132; P = .002) and overall survival (adjusted HR, 3.918; 95 % CI, 1.455-10.551; P = .007), whereas age ≥ 60 years was poor prognostic factor for only overall survival (adjusted HR, 5.0953; 95 % CI, 1.660-15.378; P = .004).

CONCLUSIONS

Surgical outcomes did not differ between the minimally invasive and open surgery group in patients with non-endometrioid endometrial cancer. Lymphovascular space invasion was a significant survival factor in this context.

Laparoscopic surgery for endometrial cancer is oncologically safe and improves hospital stay duration: a retrospective single-center study over a 16-year period

OBJECTIVE

To investigate changes in surgical procedures and patient outcomes of patients diagnosed with endometrial cancer (EC) at a German university hospital between 1998 and 2014.

METHODS

A monocentric, retrospective review was conducted to identify patients diagnosed and treated with EC during the aforementioned period at the Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics at the University Hospital Kiel, Germany.

RESULTS

303 patients were identified. Patient demographics, risk factors, histological subtypes and stages of EC remained consistent over time. The most common surgical procedure was total abdominal hysterectomy (TAH) (81.9%). In 2011, the institution carried out its first total laparoscopic hysterectomy (TLH) for EC, resulting in a significant increase in laparoscopic surgical procedures (2011-2014: N = 70; TAH 44.2%; TLH 51.4%). Although the total number of lymph node stagings remained consistent over time, there was a significant increase in the performance of simultaneous pelvic and para-aortic lymphonodectomy (LNE) compared to pelvic LNE alone (2.6 in 2001-2005 vs. 18.0% in 2011-2014, p ≤ 0.001). The duration of hospital stays significantly decreased over time, with a mean of 20.9 days in the first and 8.5 days in the last period. When comparing surgical procedures, TLHs resulted in significantly shorter postoperative stays with an average of 6.58 vs. 13.92 days for TAH. The surgical procedure performed did not affect 5-year overall survival rates in this study (84.9% for TAH and 85.3% for TLH, p = 0.85).

CONCLUSIONS

Our retrospective single-center study demonstrates that laparoscopic surgery for endometrial cancer is oncologically safe and shortens hospital stays.

Cancer-field surgery for endometrial cancer by robotic peritoneal mesometrial resection and targeted compartmental lymphadenectomy (PMMR+TCL)

OBJECTIVE

Cancer-field surgery by peritoneal mesometrial resection and targeted compartmental lymphadenectomy (PMMR+TCL) for the treatment of endometrial cancer (EC) aims at optimal locoregional tumor control without the need for adjuvant radiotherapy. In a previous publication we could demonstrate the feasibility of the method and presented encouraging first oncologic data.

METHODS

Following up our 2021 publication, we present data on the treatment of EC by PMMR+TCL in much larger cohort and with longer follow-up.

RESULTS

One hundred and thirty-five patients with EC International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) I-IV (75.6% FIGO I) underwent cancer field surgery via PMMR+TCL for EC in the years 2016-2023. Mean follow-up in our cohort was 27.5 months (0, 83; 19.7). The procedure was feasible and safe with favorable intra-and postoperative complication rates. Even though 50.4% of patients had an indication for postoperative radiotherapy following national and international guidelines, the rate of postoperative irradiation administered was 10.4%. The overall recurrence rate was 8.1% and we observed 2 (1.5%) isolated locoregional recurrences.

CONCLUSION

Our results confirm the feasibility and safety of PMMR+TCL in EC patients. Oncologic data are very encouraging and hint at a superior locoregional control without adjuvant irradiation. Larger studies with longer follow-up will be needed to confirm these results.

Comparison of Long-Term Outcomes in Early-Stage Endometrial Cancer: Robotic Single-Site vs. Multiport Laparoscopic Surgery

The purpose of this study was to establish the noninferiority of robotic single-site (RSS) surgery compared with multiport laparoscopic (MPL) surgery in surgical outcomes and overall survival for early endometrial cancer. This study was conducted retrospectively in a single center and included 421 patients who underwent either RSS (n = 146) or MPL (n = 275) surgery between 2014 and 2022. In terms of perioperative outcomes, the RSS group had a longer operating time than the MPL surgery group (mean (standard deviation [SD]) RSS 97.55 [29.79] vs. MPL 85.56 [26.13], p < 0.001). However, no significant differences in estimated blood loss or perioperative complications were found between the groups (p = 0.196 and p = 0.080, respectively). The patients in the RSS group were discharged earlier than those in the MPL group (mean [SD]): 4.06 [3.24] vs. 9.39 [4.76], p < 0.001). Regarding oncologic outcomes, no significant differences in the type of therapy, disease stage, tumor grade, histopathological type, or lymphovascular invasion were found between the groups. No statistically significant differences were found in the disease-free (p = 0.27) and overall survival rates (p = 0.5) either. In conclusion, this study suggests that RSS and MPL surgery are both safe and effective options for staging operations in patients with early-stage endometrial cancer.

Surgical Treatment for Endometrial Cancer, Hysterectomy Performed via Minimally Invasive Routes Compared with Open Surgery: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis

Background: Total hysterectomy with bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy via minimally invasive surgery (MIS) has emerged as the standard of care for early-stage endometrial cancer (EC). Prior systematic reviews and meta-analyses have focused on outcomes reported solely from randomised controlled trials (RCTs), overlooking valuable data from non-randomised studies. This inaugural systematic review and network meta-analysis comprehensively compares clinical and oncological outcomes between MIS and open surgery for early-stage EC, incorporating evidence from randomised and non-randomised studies. Methods: This study was prospectively registered on PROSPERO (CRD42020186959). All original research of any experimental design reporting clinical and oncological outcomes of surgical treatment for endometrial cancer was included. Study selection was restricted to English-language peer-reviewed journal articles published 1 January 1995-31 December 2021. A Bayesian network meta-analysis was conducted. Results: A total of 99 studies were included in the network meta-analysis, comprising 181,716 women and 14 outcomes. Compared with open surgery, laparoscopic and robotic-assisted surgery demonstrated reduced blood loss and length of hospital stay but increased operating time. Compared with laparoscopic surgery, robotic-assisted surgery was associated with a significant reduction in ileus (OR = 0.40, 95% CrI: 0.17-0.87) and total intra-operative complications (OR = 0.38, 95% CrI: 0.17-0.75) as well as a higher disease-free survival (OR = 2.45, 95% CrI: 1.04-6.34). Conclusions: For treating early endometrial cancer, minimal-access surgery via robotic-assisted or laparoscopic techniques appears safer and more efficacious than open surgery. Robotic-assisted surgery is associated with fewer complications and favourable oncological outcomes.

Laparoscopy with or without robotic assistance does not negatively impact long-term oncologic outcomes in patients with uterine serous carcinoma

OBJECTIVES

We sought to compare outcomes between minimally invasive surgery (MIS) and laparotomy in patients with clinical stage I uterine serous carcinoma (USC).

METHODS

Patients who underwent surgery for newly diagnosed USC between 11/1/1993 and 12/31/2017 were retrospectively identified and assigned to either the MIS cohort or the laparotomy cohort. Patients with conversion to laparotomy were analyzed with the MIS cohort. Chi-square and Mann-Whitney tests were used to compare categorical and continuous variables, respectively. Kaplan-Meier curves were used to estimate survival and compared using the log-rank test.

RESULTS

In total, 391 patients met inclusion criteria; 242 underwent MIS (35% non-robotic and 65% robotic-assisted laparoscopies) and 149 underwent laparotomy. Age, BMI, stage, and washings status did not differ between cohorts. Patients who underwent MIS were less likely to have lymphovascular space invasion (LVSI; 35.1% vs 48.3%), had fewer nodes removed (median, 9 vs 15), and lower rates of paraaortic nodal dissection (44.6% vs 65.1%). Rates of adjuvant therapy did not differ between cohorts. Median follow-up times were 63.0 months (MIS cohort) vs 71.0 months (laparotomy cohort; P = .04). Five-year PFS rates were 58.7% (MIS) vs 59.8% (laparotomy; P = .1). Five-year OS rates were 65.2% (MIS) compared to 63.5% (laparotomy; P = .2). On multivariable analysis, higher stage, deep myometrial invasion, and positive washings were associated with decreased PFS. Age ≥ 65 years, higher stage, LVSI, and positive washings were associated with shorter OS.

CONCLUSIONS

MIS does not compromise outcomes in patients with newly diagnosed USC and should be offered to these patients to minimize surgical morbidity.

Prospective Multicenter Trial Assessing the Impact of Positive Peritoneal Cytology Conversion on Oncological Outcome in Patients with Endometrial Cancer Undergoing Minimally Invasive Surgery with the use of an Intrauterine Manipulator : Positive Peritoneal Cytology Conversion and Its Association with Oncological Outcome in Endometrial Cancer

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive surgery is the standard approach in early-stage endometrial cancer according to evidence showing no compromise in oncological outcomes, but lower morbidity compared with open surgery. However, there are limited data available on the oncological safety of the use of intrauterine manipulators in endometrial cancer.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This prospective multicenter study included patients with endometrial cancer undergoing laparoscopic staging surgery with the use of an intrauterine manipulator. We obtained three different sets of peritoneal washings: at the beginning of the surgical procedure, after the insertion of the intrauterine manipulator, and after the closure of the vaginal vault. The rate of positive peritoneal cytology conversion and its association with oncological outcomes was assessed.

RESULTS

A total of 124 patients were included. Peritoneal cytology was negative in 98 (group 1) and positive in 26 (group 2) patients. In group 2, 16 patients presented with positive cytology at the beginning of the surgery (group 2a) and 10 patients had positive cytology conversion during the procedure (group 2b). Recurrence rate was significantly different among the study groups, amounting to 9.2%, 25.0%, and 60.0% for groups 1, 2a, and 2b, respectively (p < 0.001). Group 1 showed the best recurrence-free and overall survival, followed by group 2a, while patients in group 2b had the worst oncological outcomes (p = 0.002 and p = 0.053, respectively). Peritoneal cytology was an independent predictor of recurrence and death on multivariable analysis.

CONCLUSION

A total of 8.1% of patients with endometrial cancer undergoing minimally invasive surgery with intrauterine manipulation showed positive peritoneal cytology conversion associated with significantly worse oncological outcome.

Laparoscopic vs. open procedure for intermediate‑ and high‑risk endometrial cancer: a minimum 4-year follow-up analysis

BACKGROUND

The long-term oncologic outcomes after laparoscopic and open procedures for patients with intermediate‑ and high‑risk endometrial cancer (EC) remain unclear. Accordingly, laparoscopy cannot still be recommended as the standard choice for intermediate‑ and high‑risk EC. This retrospective study aimed to assess the perioperative and long-term oncologic outcomes of laparoscopy and open surgery in patients with intermediate- and high‑risk ECs within a minimum 4-year follow-up.

METHODS

We included 201 patients who underwent laparoscopic or open procedures for intermediate‑ and high‑risk EC between 2010 and 2017. Between-procedure comparisons of perioperative and oncological outcomes were performed using the independent t-test or Pearson's chi-squared test and the Kaplan-Meier method, respectively.

RESULTS

Finally, there were 136 intermediate‑ and 65 high‑risk endometrial tumors in the laparoscopic and open groups, respectively. There were no between-group differences in all baseline characteristics. Compared with the open group, the laparoscopic group had a significantly longer mean operating time (p = 0.005) and a lower mean estimated blood loss (EBL) (p = 0.031). There was a higher possibility of postoperative complication in the open group than in the laparoscopic group (p = 0.048). There were no significant between-group differences in pathological outcomes as well as the recurrence-free survival and overall survival rates (p = 0.626 and p = 0.148, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients with intermediate‑ and high‑risk EC, laparoscopic surgery has an advantage over the open surgery in reducing EBL and the rate of postoperative complications without weakening the oncological control. There were no between-procedure differences in the recurrence-free and overall survival rates.

A Rehabilitation Model Conducive to Postoperative Recovery of Endometrial Cancer Patients after Laparoscopy

Although collaborative care is increasingly being implemented in the treatment of various diseases, there are currently no related studies on its effects in endometrial cancer patients after laparoscopic treatment. Thus, this study is aimed at investigating the significance of an integrated medical and nursing care model for women with gynecologic malignant tumors who underwent laparoscopic treatment. The patients were randomly divided into a medical-nursing integrated nursing group (study group) and a general nursing group (control group). Their serum carbohydrate antigen 19-9 (CA19-9), human epididymal protein 4 (HE4), CA15-3, and CA125 levels were measured at admission, 7 and 15 days after admission, and 30 days after discharge. Their first postoperative flatulence time, eating time, and hospitalization duration were recorded, and the self-rating anxiety scale (SAS) and self-rating depression scale (SDS) were used to evaluate the psychological state of the patients. A questionnaire survey was also used to evaluate their satisfaction with nursing. Adverse events within 2 years of follow-up were recorded. The results showed that the clinical performance of the study group was significantly better than that of the control group. Further, the study group demonstrated significantly lower serum tumor marker levels, SAS score, SDS score, and incidence of adverse events at 7 and 15 days after admission and 30 days after discharge and higher nursing satisfaction than the control group. Thus, the collaborative nursing mode might be more conducive to the recovery of women who have underwent laparoscopic treatment for gynecologic malignant tumors than normal routine nursing.

Peri-operative and survival outcomes analysis of patients with endometrial cancer managed by three surgical approaches: a long-term Bulgarian experience

The study aim was to assess the peri-operative, oncologic, and survival outcomes for patients with endometrial cancer (EC) managed by abdominal hysterectomy (AH), laparoscopic hysterectomy (LH), or robotic hysterectomy (RH) approaches at premier centers in Bulgaria. We analyzed histologically diagnosed EC cases operated via any of the three surgical methods during 2008-2019. Data analyses included patients and tumor characteristics, peri-operative outcomes, and disease status. We grouped FIGO stages I and II to represent early-stage EC and to investigate their survival. Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression analyses were performed to determine disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS). Consecutive 917 patients (AH = 466; LH = 60, RH = 391) formed the basis of study analyses. Most of demographics and tumor characteristics of the patients were comparable across the groups except few minor variations (e.g., LH/RH cases were younger, heavier, more stage IA, endometrioid, G1, low-risk group). LH and RH group cases had significantly lower operative time than AH (p < 0.001), shorter hospital length-of-stay (p < 0.001), higher post-operative Hgb (p < 0.001). RH cases had fewer blood transfusions than AH or LH (p < 0.001). Cox multivariate analyses indicate that OS was not influenced by the type of surgical approach. Despite the fact that the DFS in "early-stage" EC is significantly better in AH group than RH, the type of surgery (i.e., AH, LH, or RH) for "all stages" is insignificant factor for DFS. With our long-term experience, minimally invasive surgical approach resulted in superior peri-operative, oncologic, and survival outcomes. Specifically, RH is not only safe in terms of post-operative results, but also for mortality and oncologic rates.

Clinical issues of surgery for uterine endometrial cancer in Japan

OBJECTIVE

The mainstay of treatment for uterine endometrial cancer is surgery, and recurrent-risk cases require multidisciplinary treatment, including surgery, chemotherapy and radiation therapy.

METHODS

The standard surgery for uterine endometrial cancer is hysterectomy and bilateral salpingooophorectomy, with additional retroperitoneal lymph node dissection and omentectomy, depending on the case. The appropriate treatment is determined based on the risk classification, such as the depth of invasion into the myometrium, diagnosis of histological type and grade, and risk assessment of lymph node metastasis.

RESULTS

Recently, minimally invasive surgery has been widely used not only in low-risk patients but also in intermediate- and high-risk patients. In low-risk patients, the possibility of ovarian preservation is discussed from a healthcare perspective for young women. Determining the need for retroperitoneal lymph node dissection based on sentinel lymph node evaluation may contribute in minimizing the incidence of post-operative lymphedema while ensuring accurate diagnosis of lymph node metastasis. Recently, many studies using sentinel lymph nodes have been reported for patients with uterine endometrial cancer, and the feasibility of sentinel lymph node mapping surgery has been proven. Unfortunately, sentinel lymph node biopsy and sentinel lymph node mapping surgery have not been widely adopted in surgery for uterine cancer in Japan. In addition, the search for biomarkers, such as RNA sequencing using The Cancer Genome Atlas, metabolic profile and lipidomic profile for early detection and prognostic evaluation, has been actively pursued.

CONCLUSIONS

Gynecologic oncologists expect to be able to provide uterine endometrial cancer patients with appropriate treatment that preserves their quality of life without compromising oncologic outcomes in the near future.

Oncologic safety of minimally invasive surgery in non-endometrioid endometrial cancer

OBJECTIVE

This study was aimed to compare the oncologic outcomes of patients with non-endometrioid endometrial cancer who underwent minimally invasive surgery with the outcomes of patients who underwent open surgery.

METHOD

This is a retrospective, multi-institutional study of patients with non-endometrioid endometrial cancer who were surgically staged by either minimally invasive surgery or open surgery. Oncologic outcomes of the patients were compared according to surgical approach.

RESULTS

113 patients met the inclusion and exclusion criteria. 57 underwent minimally invasive surgery and 56 underwent open surgery. Patients who underwent minimally invasive surgery had smaller tumors (median size, 3.3 vs. 5.2%, p = 0.0001) and a lower lymphovascular space invasion rate (29.8% vs. 48.2%, p = 0.045). In the overall population, the numbers and rate of recurrence were significantly higher in the open surgery group (p = 0.016). In multivariate analysis, disease stage and tumor size were associated with DFS in contrast to surgical procedure.

CONCLUSION

Minimally invasive surgery showed similar survival outcomes when compared to open surgery in non-endometrioid endometrial cancer patients, irrespective of disease stage. When minimally invasive surgery is managed by expert surgeons, non-endometrioid histological subtypes should not be considered a contraindication for minimally invasive surgery.

Minimally-Invasive Versus Abdominal Hysterectomy for Endometrial Carcinoma With Glandular or Stromal Invasion of Cervix

The purpose of the study was to evaluate the feasibility of laparoscopic approach versus laparotomy in endometrial cancer that extends to the cervix in the form of glandular extension and/or stromal invasion. A retrospective, single-center cohort study was conducted using data between 1995 and 2017 at an urban tertiary academic medical center. We identified patients who were diagnosed with endometrial cancer whose tumor involved the uterine cervix on final pathology. Operative and oncologic outcomes were compared between the patients who underwent minimally-invasive surgery (MIS) versus those who underwent laparotomy. A total of 282 patients with endometrial cancer were reviewed for the study. Among these patients, 76 patients underwent hysterectomy and surgical staging via MIS. There was no conversion from MIS to laparotomy. In the MIS group, shorter hospital stay (4.4 ± 2.3 days for MIS group vs. 7.1 ± 4.7 days for laparotomy group; p-value = 0.002) and less blood loss during the operations (228 mL vs. 478 mL, p-value < 0.001) were observed compared to the laparotomy group. The multivariate Cox regression analysis revealed that age at diagnosis, FIGO stage, histology grades, tumor size, lymph-vascular space invasion were independent prognostic markers for poor oncologic outcomes but the types of surgical approach (MIS vs. laparotomy) were not associated with it. The means by which colpotomy was performed (either intracorporeal or transvaginal) among the MIS group also did not affect patient survivals. Among the women with endometrial cancer that involved the uterine cervix, surgical treatment via MIS compared to laparotomy showed no difference in survival outcomes but better perioperative results. These findings support the use of MIS for these patient group.

Minimally invasive surgery for patients with advanced stage endometrial cancer

Objective: Compare the oncologic outcomes of patients with advanced stage endometrial cancer who were staged by minimally invasive surgery with the outcomes of patients who underwent open surgery. Methods: Data from 138 patients with advanced stage endometrial cancer who were treated between January 2009 and January 2019 were reviewed. The patients' data were retrieved from five institutions. The patients were divided into two groups: those who underwent open surgery and those who underwent minimally invasive surgery. Tumor characteristics, recurrence rate, disease-free survival, and overall survival were compared according to surgical approach. Results: Among the 138 patients included in this study, 72 underwent open surgery (52.2%) and 66 underwent MIS (47.8%). In patients with advanced-stage endometrial cancer, the recurrence rate was significantly higher among those who underwent open surgery (43.1% vs. 25.8%, p = 0.033). Patients with advanced-stage endometrial cancer who underwent open surgery had a significantly lower disease-free survival (p = 0.029) than those who underwent minimally invasive surgery, however, the overall survival (p = 0.051) was similar between the two groups. Conclusion: Minimally invasive surgery showed better survival outcomes when compared to open surgery in advanced-stage EC patients irrespective of the histologic type.

Survival rates of patients who undergo minimally invasive surgery for endometrial cancer with cervical involvement

Objective: Compare the oncologic outcomes of patients with intermediate-risk endometrial cancer who were staged by minimally invasive surgery with the outcomes of patients who underwent open surgery. Methods: Data from 206 patients with intermediate-risk endometrial cancer who were treated between January 2009 and January 2019 were reviewed. The patients' data were retrieved from five institutions. The patients were divided into two groups: those who underwent open surgery and those who underwent minimally invasive surgery. Tumor characteristics, recurrence rate, disease-free survival, and overall survival were compared according to surgical approach. Results: Among the 206 patients included in this study, 76 underwent open surgery (36.9%) and 130 underwent MIS (63.1%). In patients with stage IB endometrial cancer, the recurrence rate, disease-free survival, and overall survival were not significantly different between those who underwent minimally invasive surgery and those who underwent open surgery. However, in patients with stage II endometrial cancer, the recurrence rate was significantly higher among those who underwent minimally invasive surgery (37.5% vs. 5.3%, p = 0.013). Patients with stage II endometrial cancer who underwent minimally invasive surgery had a significantly lower disease-free survival (p = 0.012) than those who underwent open surgery, however, the overall survival (p = 0.252) was similar between the two groups. Conclusion: Minimally invasive surgery results in less favorable survival outcomes than open surgery in patients with stage II endometrial cancer.

Comparison of survival outcomes between laparoscopic and open surgery in patients with low-risk endometrial cancer

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the feasibility, safety and surgical outcomes of laparoscopic surgery for the treatment of low-risk endometrial cancer.

METHODS

Of 155 patients with low-risk endometrial cancer, who were included in this retrospective study between May 2008 and March 2017, 82 and 73 underwent laparoscopic and open surgery, respectively. Clinicopathological and surgical data, recurrence-free survival and overall survival were analyzed.

RESULTS

No statistically significant differences in median age, final pathological type, International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics stage and lymphovascular space involvement were observed between the laparoscopic and open surgery groups. No procedure in the laparoscopic surgery group was converted to open surgery. The median follow-up period was 60 months, with oncologic recurrence identified in three cases (one lung carcinoma and two pelvic cavity carcinomas) in the laparoscopic surgery group. There was no significant between-group difference in 5-year recurrence-free survival (laparoscopic surgery group: 96.3%, open surgery group: 92.6%) and overall survival (laparoscopic surgery group: 100%, open surgery group: 95.4%).

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic surgery is a feasible and safe treatment for endometrial cancer and should be considered as a standard treatment option for low-risk endometrial cancer.

External Iliac Artery Injury and Thrombosis during Laparoscopic Gynecologic Surgery

Although vascular injury during laparoscopic surgery is rare, it is occasionally reported. Previously, several physicians have reported cases of compartment syndrome resulting from a thrombus during gynecologic surgery. However, few reports describe thrombosis occurring in artery vessels as a result of applying angiopressure. Herein, we report the case of a 53-year-old woman with endometrioid carcinoma and a vascular injury that resulted in thrombus formation; this is the first such case to be reported. The complication was successfully treated by means of direct anastomosis following partial resection of the injured iliac artery. This is the first report of a case in which applying angiopressure for a vascular injury during laparoscopic pelvic lymphadenectomy led to an intra-arterial thrombus which was found and treated without sequelae.

Updates and Controversies of Robotic-Assisted Surgery in Gynecologic Surgery

minimally invasive surgery (MIS) is the standard approach to performance of several gynecologic procedures, including hysterectomy, gynecologic cancer staging procedures, myomectomy, pelvic organ prolapse repair, and select adnexal procedures. Robotic-assisted surgery, a computer-based MIS approach, has been adopted widely in the United States and several other countries. Robotics may offer technological and ergonomic benefits that overcome limitations associated with conventional laparoscopy; however, it is not clear that reported claims of superiority translate into improved gynecologic patient outcomes compared with other MIS approaches. This review critically appraises the evolving role, benefits, limitations, and controversies of robotic-assisted surgery utilization in benign and oncologic gynecology settings.

Perioperative outcomes of women with and without class III obesity undergoing hysterectomy for endometrioid endometrial cancer: A population-based study

OBJECTIVE

Population-based data on perioperative complications among women with endometrial cancer and severe obesity are lacking. We evaluated 30-day complication rates among women with and without class III obesity (body mass index ≥ 40 kg/m²) undergoing primary surgical management for endometrioid endometrial cancer (EEC), and how outcomes differed according to surgical approach (open vs. minimally invasive).

METHODS

We performed a retrospective population-based cohort study of women with EEC undergoing hysterectomy in Ontario, Canada, between 2006 and 2015. We evaluated perioperative complications in the whole cohort, and in a 1:1 matched analysis using hard and propensity score matching to ensure similar distributions of patient, tumour, provider and institution-level factors between women with and without class III obesity (identified using a surgical billing code). The primary outcome of interest was the 30-day perioperative complication rate.

RESULTS

12,112 women met inclusion criteria; 2697 (22.3%) had class III obesity. We matched 2320 (86%) women with class III obesity to those without. The composite complication rate was significantly higher among women with class III obesity (23.2% vs. 18.4%, standardized mean difference [SMD] = 0.12), primarily due to wound infection/disruption (12.1% vs. 6.2%). There was no difference in outcomes for women with and without class III obesity when a minimally invasive approach was used.

CONCLUSIONS

Wound infection/disruption was increased for women with class III obesity compared to women without. Otherwise, perioperative complications were similar between the matched pairs. When minimally invasive approaches were used, women with class III obesity had a similar risk of complications as women without obesity.

Long-term outcome of patients with intermediate- and high-risk endometrial cancer after pelvic and paraaortic lymph node dissection: a comparison of laparoscopic vs. open procedure

OBJECTIVE

The primary therapy for intermediate- and high-risk endometrial cancer includes pelvic and paraaortic lymph node evaluation. Laparoscopic surgery is an increasingly popular intervention due to decreased risk and better short-term morbidity; however, a recent study casts doubt on the benefit of this approach in terms of oncological safety. In this cancer registry study, we sought to evaluate the benefit of laparoscopy versus laparotomy and retrospectively compared overall survival, recurrence rates, and recurrence-free survival among patients with intermediate- and high-risk endometrial cancer who underwent either laparoscopic or open surgery.

METHODS

This observational study included 419 patients who have been treated from 2011 to 2017. We employed Kaplan-Meier method, and univariable and multivariable Cox-regression to compare overall survival, recurrence rates, and recurrence-free survival in 110 patients, who underwent laparoscopic, with 309 patients, who underwent open surgery. To address the confounding bias in this retrospective study, we also performed a propensity score matching (PSM) analysis including 357 patients (laparoscopy: n = 107; open surgery: n = 250).

RESULTS

We found a benefit for laparoscopic over open surgery in patients with intermediate- and high-risk endometrial cancer for overall survival in both univariable (p = 0.002; PSM: p = 0.016) and multivariable analyses (p = 0.019; PSM: p = 0.007). In contrast, there was no statistically significant difference between both patient groups regarding the cumulative recurrence rates. A univariable analysis identified a significant benefit for laparoscopy regarding recurrence-free survival (p = 0.003; PSM: p = 0.029) but a multivariable analysis failed to confirm this finding (p = 0.108; PSM: p = 0.118).

CONCLUSIONS

Our study provides evidence that laparoscopic systematic lymphadenectomy does not present a lower oncological efficacy than open surgery in the treatment of patients with endometrial cancer.

A comparison of disease recurrence between robotic versus laparotomy approach in patients with intermediate-risk endometrial cancer

OBJECTIVE

Advances in minimally invasive surgery, particularly with robotic surgery, have resulted in improved peri-operative outcomes in patients with endometrial cancer. In addition, randomized trials have shown that addition of adjuvant radiotherapy following surgery improves loco-regional disease control among stage I intermediate-risk endometrial cancer patients. We aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety of combined treatment of robotic surgery and adjuvant radiotherapy in this patient population.

METHODS

A single-center retrospective study was conducted on stage I endometrioid-type endometrial cancer patients with intermediate-risk features (<50% myometrial involvement and grade 2-3 histopathology, or >50% myometrial involvement and grade 1-2 histopathology) treated with hysterectomy and adjuvant radiotherapy between January 2010 and December 2015. Data on surgery and radiotherapy were collected and correlated with clinical and surgical outcomes using log-rank. Oncologic outcomes were then compared between robotic surgery and laparotomy.

RESULTS

A total of 179 intermediate-risk endometrial cancer patients were identified, of whom 135 (75.4%) received adjuvant radiotherapy and were included in the final analysis. Median age at diagnosis was 63 years (range 40-89) and median follow-up was 4.7 years (range 1.1-8.8). Seventy-seven patients (57%) underwent robotic surgery and 58 patients (43%) underwent laparotomy. Surgical staging with lymph node dissection was performed on 79.3% of the patients. The majority of patients (79.3%) received vaginal brachytherapy as part of adjuvant radiotherapy, while 20.7% received external-beam radiotherapy. Among the entire cohort, eight (5.9%) patients recurred and all eight recurrences occurred in the robotic surgery group; no recurrence was found in the laparotomy group. This translated into 5 year disease-free survival of 100% in the laparotomy group, compared with 91.8% in the robotic surgery group (p=0.005). No difference in overall survival was found between the two groups (p=0.51).

CONCLUSION

Oncologic outcomes for stage I intermediate-risk endometrial cancer treated with hysterectomy and adjuvant radiotherapy at our institution are comparable to the previously published literature. The higher recurrence rate observed with robotic surgery at our institution has not been observed previously and requires further investigation.

Evaluating unplanned readmission and prolonged length of stay following minimally invasive surgery for endometrial cancer

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate risk factors for 30-day unplanned readmission and increased length of stay (LOS) following minimally invasive surgery (MIS) for endometrial cancer.

METHODS

This was a retrospective, case-control study using the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS NSQIP). Multivariable logistic regression was used to assess perioperative variables associated with readmission and increased LOS after MIS for endometrial cancer.

RESULTS

The study population included 10,840 patients who met the criteria of having undergone MIS with a resultant endometrial malignancy confirmed on postoperative pathology. Common reasons for readmission included organ/space surgical site infection (65 cases), sepsis/septic shock (19 cases), and venous thromboembolism (20 cases). Notable risk factors for readmission included (Odds Ratio, Confidence Interval, p-value): dialysis dependence (6.77, 2.51-17.80, <0.01), increased length of stay (3.00, 2.10-4.10, <0.01), and preoperative weight loss (2.80, 1.06-7.17, 0.03); notable risk factors for increased LOS: ascites (8.51, 2.00-36.33, <0.01), operation duration >5 h (6.93, 5.29-9.25, <0.01), and preoperative blood transfusion (5.37, 2.05-14.04, <0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Identification of risk factors for adverse postoperative outcomes is necessary to inform and improve standards of care in MIS for endometrial cancer. Using nationally reported data from the ACS NSQIP, this study identifies independent risk factors for unplanned readmission and prolonged LOS, and in doing so, highlights potential avenues for quality improvement.

Laparoscopic surgical access in morbidly obese women undergoing endometrial cancer surgery: Repurposing the left upper quadrant approach

OBJECTIVE

The study purpose was to report the outcomes of patients undergoing endometrial cancer surgical staging with laparoscopic abdominal access entry using a left upper quadrant (LUQ) access technique.

METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort study conducted from 1 January 2013 to 1 January 2018. The setting was an academic, single institution gynecologic oncology service with a high volume of minimally invasive surgery (MIS). The patient cohort included obese (defined as BMI > 30 kg/m²) or morbidly obese (BMI > 40 kg/m²) women undergoing MIS for endometrial cancer staging. All patients underwent laparoscopic abdominal access via a 5-mm or 10-mm optical trocar system using a LUQ technique.

RESULTS

In total, 317 patients were included with a median age of 54 years (range, 24-79) and median BMI 42.5 kg/m² (range, 32-70); 60 % morbidly obese. Successful LUQ access was achieved in 98.1 %. Of those with a failed LUQ approach, two had undergone previous LUQ surgery and 4 had ≥1 previous midline vertical incisions. There was one LUQ trocar-related visceral injury (0.3 %) and no vascular injuries during the study period.

CONCLUSION

A LUQ abdominal technique is a safe and reliable method of laparoscopic access in morbidly obese women undergoing MIS for endometrial cancer staging. This may be the preferred method of laparoscopic access for women with a panniculus or central adiposity, given the caudal displacement of the umbilicus and poor correlation with intraperitoneal anatomic landmarks in this setting.

Minimally Invasive Surgery Rate as a Quality Metric for Endometrial Cancer

STUDY OBJECTIVE

To determine the frequency with which Commission on Cancer-accredited hospitals met a metric of ≥80% minimally invasively performed hysterectomies for endometrial cancer and to compare the clinical outcomes of hospitals meeting this metric with those that did not.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

SETTING

Hospitals caring for ≥20 endometrial cancer patients per year recorded in the National Cancer Database in 2015 were included.

PATIENTS

Women who had undergone hysterectomy for endometrial cancer and had an epithelial histology, a Charlson comorbidity score of 0, and stage I to III disease.

INTERVENTION

Patient characteristics, patterns of care, and outcomes were compared between hospitals performing ≥80% minimally invasive hysterectomies and hospitals not meeting this metric.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

The hospitals (n = 510) treated 20 670 women with endometrial cancer. In 283 (55%) hospitals ≥80% of hysterectomies were minimally invasively performed (high-minimally invasive surgery [MIS] hospitals, overall MIS rate 89%). In the 227 hospitals that did not meet this metric, 61% of hysterectomies for endometrial cancer were performed using a minimally invasive approach. In high-MIS hospitals, patients were more likely to be white (87% vs 82%, p<.001), privately insured (53% vs 49%, p <.001), and have stage I disease (84% vs 82%, p = .002) and an endometrioid histology (79% vs 76%, p <.001). Surgery was more often performed robotically (80% vs 71%), and conversion to laparotomy was less likely (1.5% vs 3.2%, adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.47; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.39-0.57) (both p <.001). Patients treated at high-MIS hospitals were more likely to have undergone lymph node assessment at the time of surgery (76% vs 69%; aOR, 1.43; 95% CI, 1.35-1.53) and been discharged on the same or next day (74% vs 57%; aOR, 2.27; 95% CI, 2.13-2.42) and were less likely to have an unplanned 30-day readmission (1.8% vs 2.9%; aOR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.53-0.77).

CONCLUSION

An MIS rate of ≥80% for endometrial cancer is feasible on a national scale and is associated with other hospital-level measurements of high-quality care.

Nationwide Introduction of Minimally Invasive Robotic Surgery for Early-Stage Endometrial Cancer and Its Association With Severe Complications

Importance

Minimally invasive laparoscopic surgery (MILS) for endometrial cancer reduces surgical morbidity compared with a total abdominal hysterectomy. However, only a minority of women with early-stage endometrial cancer undergo MILS.

Objective

To evaluate the association between the Danish nationwide introduction of minimally invasive robotic surgery (MIRS) and severe complications in patients with early-stage endometrial cancer.

Design, Setting, and Participants

In this nationwide prospective cohort study of 5654 women with early-stage endometrial cancer who had undergone surgery during the period from January 1, 2005, to June 30, 2015, data from the Danish Gynecological Cancer Database were linked with national registers on socioeconomic status, deaths, hospital diagnoses, and hospital treatments. The women were divided into 2 groups; group 1 underwent surgery before the introduction of MIRS in their region, and group 2 underwent surgery after the introduction of MIRS. Women with an unknown disease stage, an unknown association with MIRS implementation, unknown histologic findings, sarcoma, or synchronous cancer were excluded, as were women who underwent vaginal or an unknown surgical type of hysterectomy. Statistical analysis was conducted from February 2, 2017, to May 4, 2018.

Exposure

Minimally invasive robotic surgery, MILS, or total abdominal hysterectomy.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Severe complications were dichotomized and encompassed death within 30 days after surgery and intraoperative and postoperative complications diagnosed within 90 days after surgery.

Results

A total of 3091 women (mean [SD] age, 67 [10] years) were allocated to group 1, and a total of 2563 women (mean [SD] age, 68 [10] years) were allocated to group 2. In multivariate logistic regression analyses, the odds of severe complications were significantly higher in group 1 than in group 2 (odds ratio [OR], 1.39; 95% CI, 1.11-1.74). The proportion of women undergoing MILS was 14.1% (n = 436) in group 1 and 22.2% in group 2 (n = 569). The proportion of women undergoing MIRS in group 2 was 50.0% (n = 1282). In group 2, multivariate logistic regression analyses demonstrated that a total abdominal hysterectomy was associated with increased odds of severe complications compared with MILS (OR, 2.58; 95% CI, 1.80-3.70) and MIRS (OR, 3.87; 95% CI, 2.52-5.93). No difference was found for MILS compared with MIRS (OR, 1.50; 95% CI, 0.99-2.27).

Conclusions and Relevance

The national introduction of MIRS changed the surgical approach for early-stage endometrial cancer from open surgery to minimally invasive surgery. This change in surgical approach was associated with a significantly reduced risk of severe complications.

Disease-Free and Survival Outcomes for Total Laparoscopic Hysterectomy Compared With Total Abdominal Hysterectomy in Early-Stage Endometrial Carcinoma: A Meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

Laparoscopic hysterectomy is currently offered to a large number of patients, and assessing the noninferiority to abdominal hysterectomy with respect to clinical outcomes is key. We examine rates of recurrence, disease-free survival (DFS), and overall survival, and surgical complications of laparoscopic compared with abdominal hysterectomy for the treatment of early-stage endometrial cancer.

METHODS

Electronic databases were systematically searched to identify relevant studies, and patient characteristics and clinical outcomes extracted. The primary outcome was 3-year DFS, and estimates were pooled using an inverse-variance weighted meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Nine studies (4405 patients) were identified in which DFS was reported in 5 studies. The difference in 3-year DFS was 1.44% (95% confidence interval [CI], -0.65% to 3.53%) in favor of total abdominal hysterectomy, consistent with a noninferiority margin of 5%. Differences in DFS (hazard ratio, 1.10; 95% CI, 0.92-1.32), overall survival (hazard ratio, 1.16; 95% CI, 0.81-1.66), and local recurrence (difference, 0.42%; 95% CI, -0.41% to 1.25%) were not significant. Rates of intraoperative complications showed no difference (0.5%; 95% CI, -1.1% to 2.0%) based on 7 studies. There was a significant reduction in postoperative complications with the laparoscopic procedure (-6.83%; 95% CI, -9.19% to -4.47%).

CONCLUSIONS

Noninferiority of laparoscopy was demonstrated on clinical outcomes and was associated with a reduction in postoperative complications. These results support continued treatment by laparoscopic hysterectomy for early-stage endometrial cancer.

Comparison of outcomes following laparoscopic and open hysterectomy with pelvic lymphadenectomy for early stage endometrial carcinoma

INTRODUCTION

Endometrial carcinoma is the most common gynaecological malignancy. Studies have shown that laparoscopic total hysterectomy, bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy and pelvic lymph node dissection was advantageous compared to laparotomy in reducing length of stay and intraoperative blood loss. However, these studies had a predominantly Caucasian population. A comparison study was conducted among the Singapore population to investigate the differences in oncological and surgical outcomes between these two methods.

METHODS

A retrospective, single-centre cohort study was conducted. Records of hospitalised patients with Stage 1 endometrioid carcinoma from 2008 to 2014 were extracted for review. Demographic data and study-specific parameters, including operative time, length of hospitalisation, intraoperative and postoperative complications, pain scores, final staging and recurrence rates, were compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

475 endometrioid carcinoma patients were admitted for surgical staging, among whom 374 fulfilled our inclusion criteria. Out of these patients, 229 underwent laparotomy and 145 underwent laparoscopy. The race, parity and body mass index of both groups were comparable. Patients who underwent laparoscopic surgery reported reduced pain score within two hours postoperatively (p = 0.007) and at Postoperative Days 1, 2 and 3 (p < 0.001). Laparoscopic surgery also illustrated better outcomes such as reduced length of stay (p < 0.001) and reduced intraoperative blood loss (p < 0.001). The operative time, recurrence rate and disease-free intervals were comparable between both groups.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopy offered similar oncological outcomes with superior surgical outcomes compared to laparotomy. It provides a suitable alternative in the surgical staging of endometrioid carcinoma.

Clair CM, Ananth CV, Neugut AI, Hershman DL, Wright JD. Use and outcomes of minimally invasive hysterectomy for women with nonendometrioid endometrial cancers

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive hysterectomy is now used routinely for women with uterine cancer. Most studies of minimally invasive surgery for endometrial cancer have focused on low-risk endometrioid tumors, with few reports of the safety of the procedure for women with higher risk histologic subtypes.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to examine the use of and survival associated with minimally invasive hysterectomy for women with uterine cancer and high-risk histologic subtypes.

STUDY DESIGN

We used the National Cancer Database to identify women with stages I-III uterine cancer who underwent hysterectomy from 2010-2014. Women with serous carcinomas, clear cell carcinomas, and sarcomas were examined. Women who had laparoscopic or robotic-assisted hysterectomy were compared with those who underwent open abdominal hysterectomy. After a propensity score inverse probability of treatment weighted analysis, the effect of minimally invasive hysterectomy on overall, 30-day, and 90-day mortality rates was examined for each histologic subtype of uterine cancer.

RESULTS

Of 94,507 patients who were identified, 64,417 patients (68.2%) underwent minimally invasive hysterectomy. Among women with endometrioid tumors (n=81,115), 70.8% underwent minimally invasive hysterectomy. The rates of minimally invasive surgery in those women with nonendometrioid tumors (n=13,392) was 57.6% for serous carcinomas, 57.0% for clear cell tumors, 47.3% for sarcomas, 32.2% for leiomyosarcomas, 47.9% for stromal sarcomas, and 48.5% for carcinosarcomas. Performance of minimally invasive surgery increased across all histologic subtypes between 2010 and 2014. For nonendometrioid subtypes, robotic-assisted procedures accounted for 47.9-75.7% of minimally invasive hysterectomies by 2014. In a multivariable model, women with nonendometrioid tumors were less likely to undergo minimally invasive surgery than those with endometrioid tumors (P<.05). There was no association between route of surgery and 30-day, 90-day, or overall mortality rates for any of the nonendometrioid histologic subtypes.

CONCLUSION

The use of minimally invasive surgery is increasing rapidly for women with stage I-III nonendometrioid uterine tumors. Performance of minimally invasive surgery does not appear to impact survival adversely.

Laparoscopy versus laparotomy for the management of early stage endometrial cancer

BACKGROUND

This is an update of a previous Cochrane Review published in 2012, Issue 9.Surgery for endometrial cancer (hysterectomy with removal of both fallopian tubes and ovaries) is performed through laparotomy. It has been suggested that the laparoscopic approach is associated with a reduction in operative morbidity. Over the last two decades there has been a steady increase of the use of laparoscopy for endometrial cancer. This review investigated the evidence of benefits and harms of laparoscopic surgery compared with laparotomy for presumed early stage endometrial cancer.

OBJECTIVES

To compare overall survival (OS) and disease free survival (DFS) for laparoscopic surgery versus laparotomy in women with presumed early stage endometrial cancer.

SEARCH METHODS

For this update, we searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2018, Issue 5) in the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE via Ovid (April 2012 to June 2018) and Embase via Ovid (April 2012 to June 2018). We also searched registers of clinical trials, abstracts of scientific meetings and reference lists of included studies. The trial registers included NHMRC Clinical Trials Register, UKCCCR Register of Cancer Trials, Meta-Register and Physician Data Query Protocol.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing laparoscopy and laparotomy for early stage endometrial cancer.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We independently abstracted data and assessed risk of bias. We used hazard ratios (HRs) for OS and recurrence free survival (RFS), risk ratios (RR) for severe adverse events and mean differences (MD) for continuous outcomes in women who received laparoscopy or laparotomy with 9% confidence intervals (CI). These were pooled in random-effects meta-analyses.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified one new study in this update of the review. The review contains nine RCTs comparing laparoscopy with laparotomy for the surgical management of early stage endometrial cancer.All nine studies met the inclusion criteria and assessed 4389 women at the end of the studies. Six studies assessing 3993 participants with early stage endometrial cancer found no significant difference in the risk of death between women who underwent laparoscopy and women who underwent laparotomy (HR 1.04, 95% 0.86 to 1.25; moderate-certainty evidence) and five studies assessing 3710 participants found no significant difference in the risk of recurrence between the laparoscopy and laparotomy groups (HR 1.14, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.43; moderate-certainty evidence). There was no significant difference in the rate of perioperative death; women requiring a blood transfusion; and bladder, ureteric, bowel and vascular injury. However, one meta-analysis of three studies found that women in the laparoscopy group lost significantly less blood than women in the laparotomy group (MD -106.82 mL, 95% CI -141.59 to -72.06; low-certainty evidence). A further meta-analysis of two studies, which assessed 3344 women and included one very large trial of over 2500 participants, found that there was no clinical difference in the risk of severe postoperative complications in women in the laparoscopy and laparotomy groups (RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.44 to 1.38). Most studies were at moderate risk of bias. All nine studies reported hospital stay and results showed that on average, laparoscopy was associated with a significantly shorter hospital stay.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This review found low to moderate-certainty evidence to support the role of laparoscopy for the management of early endometrial cancer. For presumed early stage primary endometrioid adenocarcinoma of the endometrium, laparoscopy is associated with similar OS and DFS. Furthermore, laparoscopy is associated with reduced operative morbidity and hospital stay. There is no significant difference in severe postoperative morbidity between the two modalities.The certainty of evidence for OS and RFS was moderate and was downgraded for unclear risk of bias profiles and imprecision in effect estimates. However, most studies used adequate methods of sequence generation and concealment of allocation so studies were not prone to selection bias. Adverse event outcomes were downgraded for the same reasons and additionally for low event rates and low power thus these outcomes provided low-certainty evidence.

Minimally invasive hysterectomy surgery rates for endometrial cancer performed at National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) Centers

OBJECTIVES

Minimally invasive surgery (MIS) is a quality measure for endometrial cancer (EC) established by the Society of Gynecologic Oncology and the American College of Surgeons. Our study objective was to assess the proportion of EC cases performed by MIS at National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) centers and evaluate perioperative outcomes.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study of women who underwent surgical treatment for EC from 2013 to 2014 was conducted at four NCCN centers. Multivariable mixed logistic regression models analyzed factors associated with failure to perform MIS and perioperative complications.

RESULTS

In total 1621 patients were evaluated; 86.5% underwent MIS (robotic-assisted 72.5%, laparoscopic 20.9%, vaginal 6.6%). On multivariable analysis, factors associated with failure to undergo MIS were uterine size >12cm (Odds Ratio [OR]: 0.17, 95% CI 0.03-0.9), stage III (OR: 0.16, 95% CI 0.05-0.49) and IV disease (OR: 0.07, 95% CI 0.02-0.22). For stage I/II disease, complications occurred in 5.1% of MIS and 21.7% of laparotomy cases (p<0.01). Laparotomy was associated with increases in any complication (OR: 6.0, 95% CI 3.3-10.8), gastrointestinal (OR: 7.2, 95% CI 2.6-19.5), wound (OR: 3.7, 95% CI 1.5-9.2), respiratory (OR 37.5, 95% CI 3.9-358.0), VTE (OR 10.5, 95% CI 1.3-82.8) and 30-day readmission (OR: 2.6, 95% CI 1.4-4.9) compared to MIS.

CONCLUSIONS

At NCCN-designated centers, the MIS hysterectomy rate in EC is higher than the published national average, with low perioperative complications. Previously identified disparities of age, race, and BMI were not observed. A proposed MIS hysterectomy benchmark of >80% in EC care is feasible when performed at high volume centers.

Oncologic Safety of Laparoscopy in the Surgical Treatment of Type II Endometrial Cancer

Background

Laparoscopy is considered the method of choice in the operative treatment of type I endometrial carcinoma (EC). However, there is a paucity of data regarding the safety of endoscopy for type II EC because these malignancies have several biological similarities with ovarian cancer.

Objectives

This study aimed to evaluate the feasibility, operative outcomes, and oncologic safety of laparoscopic surgery in patients with type II EC.

Methods

A retrospective study with histologically confirmed serous or clear-cell EC without peritoneal carcinomatosis treated by laparoscopy (G1) or laparotomy (G2) was conducted. Procedures included hysterectomy, bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy, omentectomy, and pelvic and para-aortic lymphadenectomy.

Results

From 2009 to 2015, 89 patients were included; 53 women underwent laparoscopy and 36 underwent laparotomy. No relevant epidemiological or oncologic difference between groups was observed. The mean number of removed pelvic nodes was 16 [±10] and 12 [±13] in group 1 (G1) and group 2 (G2), respectively (P= 0.127). The mean number of dissected para-aortic nodes was significantly greater in the laparoscopic group (11 [±9] vs 6 [±9],P= 0.006). Para-aortic metastasis was significantly more often observed in the endoscopy group (26% vs 13%,P= 0.04). Adjuvant therapies were given to 86% of the patients in the study and 75% in the control group (P= 0.157). No excessive blood loss, casualty related to surgery, intraoperative complication, or conversion to laparotomy occurred in G1. Ten (18%) women from G1 and 36% (13/36) in G2 developed relevant postoperative complications (P= 0.03). The median duration of follow-up was 38 months for the laparoscopy and 47 months for the open surgery (P= 0.12). The 5-year overall and disease-free survival were similar, 86% versus 78% and 58% versus 51% for G1 and G2, respectively (P= 0.312).

Conclusions

Laparoscopy is oncologically at least not inferior to laparotomy for the surgical treatment of type II EC. Endoscopic techniques are feasible, effective, result in significantly less morbidity, and improved quality staging. Although statistical significance was not reached, laparoscopy was associated with superior oncologic results.

Practice guidelines for management of uterine corpus cancer in Korea: a Korean Society of Gynecologic Oncology Consensus Statement

Clinical practice guidelines for gynecologic cancers have been developed by many organizations. Although these guidelines have much in common in terms of the practice of standard of care for uterine corpus cancer, practice guidelines that reflect the characteristics of patients and healthcare and insurance systems are needed for each country. The Korean Society of Gynecologic Oncology (KSGO) published the first edition of practice guidelines for gynecologic cancer treatment in late 2006; the second edition was released in July 2010 as an evidence-based recommendation. The Guidelines Revision Committee was established in 2015 and decided to produce the third edition of the guidelines as an advanced form based on evidence-based medicine, considering up-to-date clinical trials and abundant qualified Korean data. These guidelines cover screening, surgery, adjuvant treatment, and advanced and recurrent disease with respect to endometrial carcinoma and uterine sarcoma. The committee members and many gynecologic oncologists derived key questions from the discussion, and a number of relevant scientific literatures were reviewed in advance. Recommendations for each specific question were developed by the consensus conference, and they are summarized here, together with other details. The objective of these practice guidelines is to establish standard policies on issues in clinical areas related to the management of uterine corpus cancer based on the findings in published papers to date and the consensus of experts as a KSGO Consensus Statement.

Comparative Effectiveness of Minimally Invasive Hysterectomy for Endometrial Cancer

PURPOSE

Despite the potential benefits of minimally invasive hysterectomy for uterine cancer, population-level data describing the procedure's safety in unselected patients are lacking. We examined the use of minimally invasive surgery and the association between the route of the procedure and long-term survival.

METHODS

We used the SEER-Medicare database to identify women with stage I-III uterine cancer who underwent hysterectomy from 2006 to 2011. Patients who underwent abdominal hysterectomy were compared with those who had minimally invasive hysterectomy (laparoscopic and robot-assisted). Perioperative morbidity, use of adjuvant therapy, and long-term survival were examined after propensity score balancing.

RESULTS

We identified 6,304 patients, including 4,139 (65.7%) who underwent abdominal hysterectomy and 2,165 (34.3%) who underwent minimally invasive hysterectomy; performance of minimally invasive hysterectomy increased from 9.3% in 2006 to 61.7% in 2011. Robot-assisted procedures accounted for 62.3% of the minimally invasive operations. Compared with women who underwent abdominal hysterectomy, minimally invasive hysterectomy was associated with a lower overall complication rate (22.7% v 39.7%; P < .001), and lower perioperative mortality (0.6% v 1.1%), but these women were more likely to receive adjuvant pelvic radiotherapy (34.3% v 31.3%) and brachytherapy (33.6% v 31.0%; P < .05). The complication rate was higher after robot-assisted hysterectomy compared with laparoscopic hysterectomy (23.7% v 19.5%; P = .03). There was no association between the use of minimally invasive hysterectomy and either overall (HR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.75 to 1.04) or cancer-specific (HR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.59 to 1.16) mortality.

CONCLUSION

Minimally invasive hysterectomy does not appear to compromise long-term survival for women with endometrial cancer.

Laparoscopy Versus Laparotomy in the Treatment of High-Risk Endometrial Cancer: A Propensity Score Matching Analysis

The aim of this study was to compare the long-term safety and efficacy of laparoscopic surgery and laparotomy for high-risk endometrial cancer (EC).A retrospective analysis based on our decade of clinical data of patients with high-risk EC who were comprehensively surgically staged by laparotomy or laparoscopy was performed. The surgical outcomes were compared between different approaches using propensity score matching (PSM).Eighty-one pairs of patients from the initial 220 enrolled ones were matched by PSM. The mean operative time is similar between laparotomy and laparoscopy groups (258 minutes vs. 253 minutes). The laparoscopy cohort has less blood loss (107 mL vs.414 mL, P < 0.01), shorter hospital stay (14.7 days vs. 17.7 days, P = 0.02) and significant fewer intraoperative complications (6.2% vs. 25.9%, P < 0.01). The pelvic lymph nodes dissected by laparoscopy (16.4) were significant less than that dissected by laparotomy (21.9). The 5- and 10-year survival rate for laparotomy were 89.2% and 75.8% compared with 85.3% and 85.3% for the laparoscopy. There was no significant difference in overall survival (P = 0.97).Laparoscopy is as effective as laparotomy in the long term and can be safely carried out in patients with high-risk EC for surgery treatment.

Long-term survival outcome of laparoscopic staging surgery for endometrial cancer in Taiwanese experience

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to evaluate the long-term safety and efficacy of laparoscopic staging surgery (LSS) for endometrial cancer in Taiwanese women.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This is a longitudinal study of prospectively registered 105 patients who underwent LSS for endometrial cancer between June 1995 and June 2008.

RESULTS

The mean duration of surgery was 186.8 minutes, and the mean intraoperative blood loss was 220.38 mL. The median number of retrieved pelvic lymph nodes was 18. The intraoperative complication rate was 4.8%, including two cases of ureteral injury and one case each of bladder injury, bowel injury, and vascular injury. No patient required conversion to laparotomy. During the median follow-up of 55.3 months, six cases of recurrence (5.7%) and three tumor-related deaths (2.9%) were recorded. The 5-year disease-free survival and the overall survival were 93.39% and 98.05%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

The study revealed favorable perioperative outcomes and better long-term survival than reported in the Taiwan Cancer Registry, and similar good surgical results to those reported in the Western studies. Therefore, LSS by experienced surgeons for endometrial cancer is a feasible and efficacious alternative to laparotomy.

The role of laparoscopy in the surgical treatment of endometrial cancer

Introduction

Endometrial carcinoma is one of the most common neoplasms in gynecological oncology and the most common genital cancer in women in developed countries. The 5-year overall survival rate depends on the FIGO stage. For patients with stage I endometrial cancer it is estimated as 80%. Traditionally, the main treatment of endometrial cancer consists of total abdominal hysterectomy with bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy and, in some histological or clinical stages, with additional pelvic lymphadenectomy. The main surgical approach so far for women with endometrial cancer has been laparotomy. However, in the last decades there have been many reports stating that the survival rate in such cases is similar after laparoscopy and laparotomy. Some researchers claim that laparoscopy is as effective as laparotomy, and it might be much more precise than laparotomy thanks to its special optic system.

Aim

To establish the method of choice for treatment of stage I endometrial cancer.

Material and methods

Comparing the preliminary results from data collected during surgical procedures performed at the First Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology of the Medical Centre of Postgraduate Education in Warsaw and the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology of the Rural Hospital in Garwolin.

Results

Laparoscopy is as effective as laparotomy, and it might be much more precise than laparotomy.

Conclusions

Taking into consideration all the above arguments, if an experienced endoscopic surgeon and proper laparoscopic equipment are available, laparoscopy might become the method of choice for treatment of stage I endometrial cancer.

An analysis of current treatment practice in uterine papillary serous and clear cell carcinoma at two high volume cancer centers

Objective

Despite the rarity of uterine papillary serous carcinoma (UPSC) and uterine clear cell carcinoma (UCCC), they contribute disproportionately to endometrial cancer deaths. Sufficient clinical information regarding treatment and prognosis is lacking. The aim of this study is to evaluate treatment outcomes in a rare cancer cohort based on the experience at two tertiary care cancer centers.

Methods

Clinicopathologic data were retrospectively collected on 279 patients with UPSC and UCCC treated between 1995 to 2011. Mode of surgery, use of adjuvant treatment, and dissection of paraaoritc lymph nodes were evaluated for their association with overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS).

Results

40.9% of patients presented with stage I disease, 6.8% of patients presented with stage II disease and 52.3% of patients presented with stages III and IV. Median follow-up was 31 months (range, 1 to 194 months). OS and PFS at 5 years were 63.0% and 51.9%, respectively. OS and PFS were not affected by mode of surgery (open vs. robotic approach; OS: hazard ratio [HR], 0.68; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.28 to 1.62; PFS: HR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.40 to 1.56). Adjuvant treatment was associated with improved OS in stages IB-II (HR, 0.14; 95% CI, 0.02 to 0.78; p=0.026) but not in stage IA disease. There was no difference in OS or PFS based on the performance of a paraaoritc lymph node dissection.

Conclusion

Minimally invasive surgical staging appears a reasonable strategy for patients with non-bulky UPSC and UCCC and was not associated with diminished survival. Adjuvant treatment improved 5-year survival in stages IB-II disease.

Surgical management of early endometrial cancer: an update and proposal of a therapeutic algorithm

In the last few years technical improvements have produced a dramatic shift from traditional open surgery towards a minimally invasive approach for the management of early endometrial cancer. Advancement in minimally invasive surgical approaches has allowed extensive staging procedures to be performed with significantly reduced patient morbidity. Debate is ongoing regarding the choice of a minimally invasive approach that has the most effective benefit for the patients, the surgeon, and the healthcare system as a whole.

Surgical treatment of women with presumed early endometrial cancer should take into account the features of endometrial disease and the general surgical risk of the patient. Women with endometrial cancer are often aged, obese, and with cardiovascular and metabolic comorbidities that increase the risk of peri-operative complications, so it is important to tailor the extent and the radicalness of surgery in order to decrease morbidity and mortality potentially derivable from unnecessary procedures. In this regard women with negative nodes derive no benefit from unnecessary lymphadenectomy, but may develop short- and long-term morbidity related to this procedure. Preoperative and intraoperative techniques could be critical tools for tailoring the extent and the radicalness of surgery in the management of women with presumed early endometrial cancer. In this review we will discuss updates in surgical management of early endometrial cancer and also the role of preoperative and intraoperative evaluation of lymph node status in influencing surgical options, with the aim of proposing a management algorithm based on the literature and our experience.

Prospective randomized study comparing robotic-assisted hysterectomy and regional lymphadenectomy with traditional laparotomy for staging of endometrial carcinoma -initial Indian experience

Robotic assisted hysterectomy with regional lymphadenectomy is increasingly used for the treatment of endometrial carcinoma. In the present study we evaluated the feasibility and technique of robotic assisted hysterectomy and lymphadenectomy in patients with endometrial carcinoma. A prospective randomized study was undertaken from July 2011 to June 2012, in 50 consecutive patients with carcinoma endometrium. Demographic (age, BMI) and perioperative data (operating time, estimated blood loss, total number of lymph nodes retrieved, hospital stay, conversion to open procedure, intraoperative and postoperative complications) of robotic assisted surgery were compared with open staging procedure. Mean age of the patient and BMI in both groups were comparable with no significant difference. Estimated blood loss (81.28 ml), hospital stay (1.94 days) and perioperative complications were significantly less in robotic assisted group in comparison to open method. Mean number of lymph nodes removed were 30.56 versus 27.6 which is suggestive of significant difference statistically. Operative time decreased as the experience of the surgeon increased but still significantly remained higher than the open procedure after 25 robotic assisted surgeries. All robotic surgeries were completed successfully without converting to open method. Robotic assisted staging procedure for endometrial carcinoma is feasible without converting to open method, with the advantages of decreased blood loss, short duration of hospital stay and less postoperative minor complications. Operative time will decrease further as the experience of surgeon increases. Para-aortic lymph node dissection is easily done and with a better ergonomics for surgeon.