Use and outcomes of minimally invasive hysterectomy for women with nonendometrioid endometrial cancers

Oncologic and Perioperative Outcomes of Robot-Assisted Versus Conventional Laparoscopy for the Treatment of Clinically Uterine-Confined High-Grade Adenocarcinoma

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to compare oncologic and perioperative outcomes of robot-assisted laparoscopy (RA) and conventional laparoscopy (LSC) in apparent clinically uterine-confined, high-grade adenocarcinoma.

METHODS

A retrospective review was conducted to identify patients with newly diagnosed high-grade uterine adenocarcinoma treated at our institution between 1 January 2009 and 30 June 2021. Exclusion criteria included bulky extrauterine disease, no lymph node assessment, or synchronous tumors. Clinicopathologic details were obtained from medical records. Postoperative complications were classified using the Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center Surgical Secondary Events system, and statistical analysis was performed using appropriate tests.

RESULTS

Of 901 patients identified, 748 (83%) underwent RA and 153 (17%) underwent LSC. Median age was 65 years (range 25-92) and median body mass index was 30 kg/m2 (range 15-60). Overall, 650 patients (72%) had 2009 International Federation of Obstetrics and Gynecology (FIGO) stage I disease. Forty-one patients (4.6%) converted to laparotomy-26 (3.5%) from RA versus 15 (9.8%) from LSC (p = 0.02). Postoperative complications occurred in 81 patients (9.0%), with no significant differences in type or rate between groups. Median operative time was 192 mins (range 88-936) for RA versus 168 mins (range 90-372) for LSC (p = 0.002). Median follow-up was 52 months (range 1-163) for RA and 66 months (range 7-165) for LSC. Four-year progression-free survival (PFS) and disease-specific survival (DSS) were similar between groups. Multivariate analysis showed stage, histology, peritoneal cytology, and lymphovascular invasion predicated a decrease in PFS and DSS.

CONCLUSIONS

RA demonstrated comparable oncologic outcomes to LSC in patients with high-grade endometrial carcinoma, with no significant difference in postoperative complications or long-term survival.

Oncological outcomes after laparotomic, laparoscopic, and robot-assisted laparoscopic staging for early-stage high-intermediate or high-risk endometrial cancer

OBJECTIVES

To compare oncological outcomes in patients with early-stage high-intermediate or high-risk endometrial cancer undergoing surgical staging by laparotomy, conventional laparoscopy, or robot-assisted laparoscopy.

METHODS

Patients diagnosed between 2015 and 2021 with stage I-II (International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics 2009), high-intermediate or high-risk endometrial cancer who underwent staging surgery, were identified in the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Five-year disease-free survival and overall survival were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method, and differences between groups were evaluated using log-rank testing. Additionally, survival analyses were stratified by histological subtype. The effect of surgical modality on risk of recurrence and all-cause death was assessed by performing Cox regression analysis with inverse probability treatment weighting.

RESULTS

In total 941 patients met the inclusion criteria, of whom 399 (42.4%) underwent staging surgery by laparotomy, 273 (29.0%) by laparoscopy, and 269 (28.6%) by robot-assisted laparoscopy. Baseline characteristics were comparable between the three groups. No difference in disease-free survival (75.0% vs 71.2% vs 79.0% p=0.35) or overall survival (72.7% vs 72.3% vs 71.2% p=0.98) was observed between patients after laparotomy, laparoscopy, or robot-assisted laparoscopy, respectively. Subanalyses based on histological subtype showed comparable disease-free survival and overall survival between surgical approaches. After correcting for possible confounders by means of inverse probability treatment weighting, there was no significantly increased risk of recurrence or risk of all-cause death after laparoscopy or robot-assisted laparoscopy.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic and robot-assisted laparoscopic staging surgery in women with early-stage high-intermediate or high-risk endometrial cancer are safe alternatives to laparotomic staging surgery.

Practice patterns, time trends and quality of care of uterine cancer in Belgium: An analysis of the EFFECT database

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the practice patterns and quality of care for uterine cancer on a national level in Belgium, including trends in practice over the period 2012-2016.

METHODS

Quality indicators were measured using the EFFectiveness of Endometrial Cancer Treatment (EFFECT) database. Multivariable logistic mixed regression was used to test for associations between the quality indicators and year of diagnosis, adjusted for potential confounders and intra-cluster correlations.

RESULTS

The EFFECT database includes 4178 patients diagnosed with uterine cancer in the period 2012-2016. Minimally invasive surgery (laparoscopic or robotic-assisted) was applied in 61.6% of patients who had surgery for clinical stage I endometrial carcinoma (EC), increasing from 52.9% in 2012 to 66.4% in 2016. At least pelvic lymph node staging was performed in 69.0% of patients with clinical stage I, high-grade EC; and in 63.9% of patients with clinical stage I-II serous carcinoma, clear cell carcinoma or carcinosarcoma. The latter increased from 48.8% in 2012 to 77.2% in 2016. Adjuvant radiotherapy (external beam and/or brachytherapy) was offered to 33.5% of patients who had surgery without lymph node staging for pathological stage I EC at high-intermediate or high risk of recurrence. Adjuvant chemotherapy was administered to 64.4% of patients with pathological stage III-IVA EC.

CONCLUSIONS

Study results indicate an overall good quality of care for patients with uterine cancer in Belgium. Treatment areas with potential room for improvement include the use of minimally invasive surgery, comprehensive surgical staging and adjuvant therapy, which confirms the remaining controversies in uterine cancer treatment and the need for further research.

Comparison of Minimally Invasive and Open Surgery for the Treatment of Endometrial Cancer with a High Risk of Recurrence: A Propensity Score Matching Study in Korea and Taiwan

BACKGROUND

This study compared oncologic outcomes between minimally invasive surgery (MIS) and open surgery for the treatment of endometrial cancer with a high risk of recurrence.

METHODS

This study included patients with endometrial cancer who underwent primary surgery at two tertiary centers in Korea and Taiwan. Low-grade advanced-stage endometrial cancer (endometrioid grade 1 or 2) or endometrial cancer with aggressive histology (endometrioid grade 3 or non-endometrioid) at any stage was considered to have a high risk of recurrence. We conducted 1:1 propensity score matching between the MIS and open surgery groups to adjust for the baseline characteristics.

RESULTS

Of the total of 582 patients, 284 patients were included in analysis after matching. Compared with open surgery, MIS did not show a difference in disease-free survival [hazard ratio (HR) 1.09; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.67-1.77, P = 0.717] or overall survival (HR 0.67; 95% CI 0.36-1.24, P = 0.198). In the multivariate analysis, non-endometrioid histology, tumor size, tumor cytology, depth of invasion, and lymphovascular space invasion were risk factors for recurrence. There was no association between the surgical approach and either recurrence or mortality in the subgroup analysis according to stage and histology.

CONCLUSIONS

MIS did not compromise survival outcomes for patients with endometrial cancer with a high risk of recurrence when compared with open surgery.

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.

Minimally Invasive Compared With Open Surgery in High-Risk Endometrial Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To compare outcomes between minimally invasive surgery and open surgery in patients with high-risk endometrial cancer.

DATA SOURCES

A cohort study of all patients who underwent surgery for high-risk endometrial cancer between 1999 and 2016 at Mayo Clinic (Rochester, Minnesota) and a literature search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, ClinicalTrials.gov, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Scopus of all published studies until December 2020.

METHODS OF STUDY SELECTION

The systematic review identified 2,332 patients (14 studies, all retrospective except a subanalysis of a randomized comparison) and the cohort study identified 542 additional patients. Articles were included if reporting original data on overall survival and disease-free survival among patients with high-risk endometrial cancer, defined as International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics grade 3 endometrioid, serous, clear cell, mixed histology, or uterine carcinosarcoma. Studies that did not report at least one of the main outcomes, those in which one surgical technique (robotic or laparoscopic surgery) was missing in the comparison analysis with open surgery, and case reports were excluded. Additional data were extracted from a retrospective cohort of patients from Mayo. A random-effect model was used for meta-analysis.

TABULATION, INTEGRATION, AND RESULTS

This systematic review and meta-analysis was registered in PROSPERO. Literature search and data extraction were performed independently by two reviewers, as well as quality assessment using GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) methodology, and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines were followed. Meta-analysis showed that disease-free survival and overall survival in patients with high-risk endometrial cancer who underwent minimally invasive surgery were not statistically different from those of patients who underwent open abdominal surgery (relative risk [RR] 0.93, 95% CI 0.82-1.05, I2 20%, P=.23; and RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.77-1.11, I2 31%, P=.12, respectively). Subgroup analysis by stage (early vs advanced) did not identify a difference between surgical approaches.

CONCLUSION

Minimally invasive surgery and open surgery had similar disease-free survival and overall survival in patients with high-risk endometrial cancer.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO, CRD42021275535.

Comparison of Surgical Outcomes of Robotic versus Conventional Laparoscopic Hysterectomy of Large Uterus with Gynecologic Benign Disease

Hysterectomy is commonly performed for benign gynecological diseases. Minimally invasive surgical approaches offer several advantages. Unfortunately, few studies have compared the outcomes of different types of minimally invasive surgeries. Therefore, this study aimed to compare the surgical outcomes of robotic hysterectomy (RH) and conventional laparoscopic hysterectomy (CLH) in benign gynecologic diseases. We performed a retrospective cohort study at a single center between January 2014 and July 2022. A total of 397 patients (RH: 197 and CLH: 200) who underwent minimally invasive hysterectomy for benign diseases with uterine size exceeding 250 g were enrolled, and factors related to the surgical outcomes were compared. The median age was 46 (range, 35-74) years, and the median uterine weight was 400 (range, 250-2720) g. There were no significant differences between the two groups regarding age, body mass index, uterine weight, hospital stay, estimated blood loss, or operating time. Intraoperative and postoperative complication rates were not significantly different between the two groups. RH was not inferior to CLH in terms of perioperative and immediate postoperative outcomes in our study.

Minimally invasive surgery versus open surgery in high-risk histologic endometrial cancer patients: A meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To compare the effects of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) and open surgery (OPS) on the risk of recurrence and mortality in patients with endometrial cancer (EC) of high-risk histology (grade 3 endometrioid adenocarcinoma, papillary serous carcinoma [PS], clear cell carcinoma [CC], and carcinosarcoma) using meta-analysis.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We systematically reviewed published studies comparing MIS and OPS in EC patients with high-risk histology until January 2022. The endpoints were recurrence and mortality rate. Study design features that may have affected participant selection, recurrence/death detection, and manuscript publication were assessed. For pooled estimates of the effect of MIS on recurrence/mortality, the random- or fixed-effects meta-analytical models were used after assessing the cross-study heterogeneity.

RESULT

Nine observational studies (eight retrospective and one prospective) fulfilled our search criteria (MIS, 8877 patients; OPS, 5751 patients). The fixed-effects model-based meta-analysis indicated that MIS did not significantly increase the risk of recurrence (hazard ratio [HR], 0.86; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.71-1.05; p = 0.13) and mortality (HR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.79-0.93; p < 0.001) when compared with OPS. This pattern was also observed in the subgroup analyses based on the stage (early stage vs. all stage), histology (PS and CC), and MIS type (laparoscopy vs. robotic). There was no evidence of publication bias.

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis of observational studies revealed that MIS did not compromise the prognosis of EC patients with high-risk histology. Well-designed randomized controlled trials could verify the results of this uncommon but deadly tumor.

Could the Long-Term Oncological Safety of Laparoscopic Surgery in Low-Risk Endometrial Cancer also Be Valid for the High-Intermediate- and High-Risk Patients? A Multi-Center Turkish Gynecologic Oncology Group Study Conducted with 2745 Endometrial Cancer Cases. (TRSGO-End-001)

This study was conducted to compare the long-term oncological outcomes of laparotomy and laparoscopic surgeries in endometrial cancer under the light of the 2016 ESMO-ESGO-ESTRO risk classification system, with particular focus on the high–intermediate- and high-risk categories. Using multicentric databases between January 2005 and January 2016, disease-free and overall survivals of 2745 endometrial cancer cases were compared according to the surgery route (laparotomy vs. laparoscopy). The high–intermediate- and high-risk patients were defined with respect to the 2016 ESMO-ESGO-ESTRO risk classification system, and they were analyzed with respect to differences in survival rates. Of the 2745 patients, 1743 (63.5%) were operated by laparotomy, and the remaining were operated with laparoscopy. The total numbers of high–intermediate- and high-risk endometrial cancer cases were 734 (45%) patients in the laparotomy group and 307 (30.7%) patients in the laparoscopy group. Disease-free and overall survivals were not statistically different when compared between laparoscopy and laparotomy groups in terms of low-, intermediate-, high–intermediate- and high-risk endometrial cancer. In conclusion, regardless of the endometrial cancer risk category, long-term oncological outcomes of the laparoscopic approach were found to be comparable to those treated with laparotomy. Our results are encouraging to consider laparoscopic surgery for high–intermediate- and high-risk endometrial cancer cases.

Survival implication of lymphadenectomy in patients surgically treated for apparent early-stage uterine serous carcinoma

OBJECTIVE

Uterine serous carcinoma (USC) is a rare highly aggressive disease. In the present study, we aimed to investigate the survival implication of the systematic lymphadenectomy in patients who underwent surgery for apparent early-stage USC.

METHODS

Consecutive patients with apparent early-stage USC surgically treated at six Italian referral cancer centers were analyzed. A comparison was made between patients who underwent retroperitoneal staging including at least pelvic lymphadenectomy "LND" vs. those who underwent hysterectomy alone "NO-LND". Baseline, surgical and oncological outcomes were analyzed. Kaplan- Meier curves were calculated for disease-free survival (DFS) and disease-specific survival (DSS). Associations were evaluated with Cox proportional hazard regression and summarized using hazard ratio (HR).

RESULTS

One hundred forty patients were analyzed, 106 LND and 34 NO-LND. NO-LND group (compared to LND group) included older patients (median age, 73 vs.67 years) and with higher comorbidities (median Charlson Comorbidity Index, 6 vs. 5) (p<0.001). No differences in terms of recurrence rate (LND vs. NO-LND, 33.1% vs. 41.4%; p=0.240) were observed. At Cox regression analysis lymphadenectomy did not significantly influence DFS (HR=0.59; 95% confidence interval [CI]=0.32-1.08; p=0.09), and DSS (HR=0.14; 95% CI=0.02-1.21; multivariable analysis p=0.07). Positive node was independently associated with worse DFS (HR=6.22; 95% CI=3.08-12.60; p<0.001) and DSS (HR=5.51; 95% CI=2.31-13.10; p<0.001), while adjuvant chemotherapy was associated with improved DFS (HR=0.38; 95% CI=0.17-0.86; p=0.02) and age was independently associated with worse DSS (HR=1.07; 95% CI=1.02-1.13; p<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Although lymphadenectomy did not show survival benefits in patients who underwent surgery for apparent early-stage USC, the presence of lymph node metastasis was the main adverse prognostic factors, supporting the prognostic role of the retroperitoneal staging also in this histological subtype.

Surgical and Patient Outcomes of Robotic Versus Conventional Laparoscopic Hysterectomy: A Systematic Review

Hysterectomy is a commonly performed gynecologic surgery that can be associated with significant morbidity and mortality. However, the evolution of the surgical approach, from open to minimally invasive gynecologic surgery (MIGS), has substantially improved patient outcomes by reducing perioperative complications, pain, and length of hospitalization. The evident advantages and the approval of the da Vinci Surgical System by the Food and Drug Administration led to the exponential rise in the use of MIGS. In particular, robotic hysterectomy (RH) witnessed unparalleled popularity compared to other MIGS despite the lack of strong evidence demonstrating its superiority. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review of the literature to evaluate and compare various patient and surgical outcomes of RH with conventional laparoscopic hysterectomy (CLH), including operating time, estimated blood loss, length of hospitalization, overall complications, survival, and cost. Overall, the outcomes were comparable between RH and CLH except concerning cost. RH is significantly more expensive than CLH due to the higher costs of robotic equipment, including disposable instruments, equipment maintenance, and sterilization. Although RH demonstrated comparable outcomes and higher costs, its technical advantages such as improved ergonomics, three-dimensional view, a wider range of wristed mobility, mechanical lifting of robot's hand, and greater stability might benefit patient subsets (e.g., obesity, large uterine weights >750 g). Therefore, large and multicentered randomized control trials are imperative to determine the most effective surgical approach between RH and other MIGS for different patient subsets.

Laparoscopic vs. robotic-assisted laparoscopy in endometrial cancer staging: large retrospective single-institution study

Objective

The aim of this study is to analyze and draw the potential differences between the robotic-assisted surgery (RS) and the laparoscopy (LPS) in endometrial cancer staging.

Methods

In this single-institution retrospective study we enrolled 1,221 consecutive clinical stage I–III endometrial cancer patients undergone minimally invasive surgical staging. We compared patients treated by LPS and by RS, on the basis of perioperative and oncological outcomes (disease-free survival [DFS] and overall survival [OS]). A sub-analysis of the high-risk endometrial cancer population was performed in the 2 cohorts.

Results

The 2 cohorts (766 treated by LPS and 455 by RS) were homogeneous in terms of perioperative and pathological data. We recorded differences in number of relapse/progression (11.7% in LPS vs. 7% in RS, p=0.008) and in number of deaths (9.8% in LPS vs. 4.8% in RS, p=0.002). Whereas, univariate and multivariate analyses according to DFS and OS confirmed that the surgical approach did not influence the DFS or the OS. In the multivariable analysis the association of the age and grading was significant for DFS and OS. In the sub-analysis of the 426 high risk EC patients (280 in LPS and 146 in RS) the univariate and the multivariate confirmed the influence of the age in DFS and OS, independently of the minimally invasive approach.

Conclusions

In our large retrospective analysis, we confirmed that the RS and LPS have similar efficacy and safety for endometrial cancer staging also for the high-risk endometrial cancer patients.

Surgical trends, outcomes and disparities in minimal invasive surgery for patients with endometrial cancer in England: a retrospective cohort study

OBJECTIVE

To examine surgical outcomes and trends in the implementation of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) use for endometrial cancer (EC).

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

SETTING

English National Health Service hospitals 2011-2017/2018.

POPULATION

35 304 patients having a hysterectomy for EC identified from Hospital Episode Statistics.

METHODS

Univariate and multivariate analyses compared MIS to open hysterectomy (OH) by assessing the association between demographic, clinical and hospital characteristics by using logistic regression. A propensity score was created, to control for confounding factors including demographics, clinical and hospital characteristics, from a logistic regression which enabled the inverse probability weighting of treatment to be applied in order to compare outcomes of treatment.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The association between route of surgery on perioperative morbidity and mortality.

RESULTS

The MIS rate rose from 40.3% in 2011 to 68.7% in 2017/2018, however, there was significant geographical variation (p<0.001). The overall 90-day mortality was significantly higher with OH versus MIS (OR 0.34, 95% CI 0.18 to 0.62, p=0.0002). MIS rates were significantly lower in patients from the lowest socioeconomic group (LSEG) compared with patients from the highest group (HSEG) (55.4% vs 59.9%, p<0.01), and in the black population as compared with white and Asian populations (40.4% vs 58.6% and 56.0%, p<0.0001). When patients from LSEG and black patients were treated in hospitals with high MIS rates, the MIS rate increased close to that of the HSEG and white patients (81.0% and 74.1% vs 83.2% and 82.6%).

CONCLUSIONS

Further investigation is needed to understand the barriers to MIS and improve access so that as many patients as possible can benefit from the reduced morbidity/mortality associated with MIS.