OBJECTIVE: To compare the quality of life (QoL) of women affected by endometrial cancer treated with surgery with or without systematic lymphadenectomy. STUDY DESIGN: Consecutive patients affected by stages I and II endometrial cancer and treated with surgery between 2008 and 2011 were selected. Eligible subjects were divided into two groups: Group A consisted of 36 patients who had hysterectomy plus bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy without lymphadenectomy; Group B consisted of 40 patients who had hysterectomy plus salpingo-oophorectomy plus pelvic and aortic lymphadenectomy. The EORTC Quality of Life Questionnaire-Cancer Module (QLQ-C30) and Quality of Life Questionnaire-Endometrial Cancer Module (QLQ-EN24) were administered to selected patients. All data were recorded and then analyzed using the scoring manual of the EORTC Quality of Life Group. RESULTS: Among symptom scales, only lymphedema gave a statistically significant difference among two groups, with a score of 10.64 ± 17.43 in Group A and 21.66 ± 24.51 in Group B (p=0.0285). The p value obtained comparing the "Global Health Status" (items 29 and 30) in Group A and in Group B was not statistically significant. CONCLUSION: Lymphadenectomy did not influence negatively global health status, but lymphadenectomy maintained its importance in determining a patient's prognosis and in tailoring adjuvant therapies. We therefore support its practice as part of the surgical procedure in patients affected by high risk endometrial cancer.
OBJECTIVE: To compare the quality of life (QoL) of women affected by endometrial cancer treated with surgery with or without systematic lymphadenectomy. STUDY DESIGN: Consecutive patients affected by stages I and II endometrial cancer and treated with surgery between 2008 and 2011 were selected. Eligible subjects were divided into two groups: Group A consisted of 36 patients who had hysterectomy plus bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy without lymphadenectomy; Group B consisted of 40 patients who had hysterectomy plus salpingo-oophorectomy plus pelvic and aortic lymphadenectomy. The EORTC Quality of Life Questionnaire-Cancer Module (QLQ-C30) and Quality of Life Questionnaire-Endometrial Cancer Module (QLQ-EN24) were administered to selected patients. All data were recorded and then analyzed using the scoring manual of the EORTC Quality of Life Group. RESULTS: Among symptom scales, only lymphedema gave a statistically significant difference among two groups, with a score of 10.64 ± 17.43 in Group A and 21.66 ± 24.51 in Group B (p=0.0285). The p value obtained comparing the "Global Health Status" (items 29 and 30) in Group A and in Group B was not statistically significant. CONCLUSION: Lymphadenectomy did not influence negatively global health status, but lymphadenectomy maintained its importance in determining a patient's prognosis and in tailoring adjuvant therapies. We therefore support its practice as part of the surgical procedure in patients affected by high risk endometrial cancer.