Literature DB >> 27637526

Robotic surgery compared with laparotomy for high-grade endometrial cancer.

Alok Pant1, Julian Schink2, John Lurain2.   

Abstract

High-grade endometrial cancer often presents with occult metastatic disease and this presentation pattern can be considered a contraindication to minimally invasive surgery. We sought to compare the surgical and oncologic outcomes of patients with high-grade endometrial cancer who underwent surgical management/staging via the robotic approach versus the traditional open approach. A retrospective analysis was performed of patients with high-grade endometrial cancer who were treated at a single institution from January 2008 through December 2011. High-grade endometrial histology was defined as FIGO grade 2 or 3 endometrioid, serous, clear cell or uterine carcinosarcoma. Pre-operatively, all patients had clinical stage I disease based on a combination of physical examination and imaging studies. Baseline patient demographics, operative results, complications and oncologic outcomes were analyzed. Eighty consecutive patients were included. Forty-seven patients underwent surgical management using the robotic approach and 33 patients underwent a traditional operation via laparotomy. The groups were well matched in terms of age, body mass index, medical co-morbidities, stage and histology. The average hospital stay for patients who underwent open surgery was significantly longer than for those who underwent a robotic approach [5.6 versus 1.4 days (p = 0.0001)]. Of the patients who underwent robotic surgery, 7/47 (15 %) experienced an operative complication versus 18/33 (55 %) in the open surgery cohort (p = 0.002). The average number of pelvic lymph nodes retrieved in each cohort was 12. The average number of para-aortic lymph nodes retrieved in each group was 4. On final pathologic analysis, 20 patients in the robotic surgery arm were found to have disease that had spread beyond the uterus (43 %), compared to 14 in the traditional surgery group (42 %). There were 11/47 (23 %) recurrences in the robotic surgery group during the study period, compared to 8/33 (24 %) in the laparotomy group. There were no significant differences in progression-free or overall survival between the two cohorts. Robotic surgery is safer than laparotomy for patients with high-grade endometrial cancer. The oncologic outcomes appear similar. Minimizing morbidity in this patient population is important since many are elderly and will require adjuvant therapy.

Entities:  

Keywords:  High-grade endometrial cancer; Robotic surgery

Year:  2014        PMID: 27637526     DOI: 10.1007/s11701-013-0448-6

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Robot Surg        ISSN: 1863-2483


  12 in total

Review 1.  Robotic-assisted hysterectomy for endometrial cancer compared with traditional laparoscopic and laparotomy approaches: a systematic review.

Authors:  Giorgia Gaia; Robert W Holloway; Luigi Santoro; Sarfraz Ahmad; Elena Di Silverio; Arsenio Spinillo
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2010-12       Impact factor: 7.661

2.  Revised FIGO staging for carcinoma of the vulva, cervix, and endometrium.

Authors:  Sergio Pecorelli
Journal:  Int J Gynaecol Obstet       Date:  2009-05       Impact factor: 3.561

3.  Updating of a recent meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials to assess the safety and the efficacy of the laparoscopic surgery for treating early stage endometrial cancer.

Authors:  Stefano Palomba; Angela Falbo; Tiziana Russo; Fulvio Zullo
Journal:  Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2009-04-16       Impact factor: 5.482

4.  Factors associated with Type I and Type II endometrial cancer.

Authors:  Ashley S Felix; Joel L Weissfeld; Roslyn A Stone; Robert Bowser; Mamatha Chivukula; Robert P Edwards; Faina Linkov
Journal:  Cancer Causes Control       Date:  2010-07-14       Impact factor: 2.506

5.  Recurrence and survival after random assignment to laparoscopy versus laparotomy for comprehensive surgical staging of uterine cancer: Gynecologic Oncology Group LAP2 Study.

Authors:  Joan L Walker; Marion R Piedmonte; Nick M Spirtos; Scott M Eisenkop; John B Schlaerth; Robert S Mannel; Richard Barakat; Michael L Pearl; Sudarshan K Sharma
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2012-01-30       Impact factor: 44.544

6.  Surgical outcomes in gynecologic oncology in the era of robotics: analysis of first 1000 cases.

Authors:  Pamela J Paley; Dan S Veljovich; Chirag A Shah; Elise N Everett; Amy E Bondurant; Charles W Drescher; William A Peters
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2011-03-16       Impact factor: 8.661

7.  Minimally invasive surgery versus laparotomy in women with high grade endometrial cancer: a multi-site study performed at high volume cancer centers.

Authors:  Amanda Nickles Fader; Leigh G Seamon; Pedro F Escobar; Heidi E Frasure; Laura A Havrilesky; Kristine M Zanotti; Angeles Alvarez Secord; John F Boggess; David E Cohn; Jeffrey M Fowler; Gregory Skafianos; Emma Rossi; Paola A Gehrig
Journal:  Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2012-04-30       Impact factor: 5.482

8.  Uterine papillary serous carcinoma: patterns of metastatic spread.

Authors:  B A Goff; D Kato; R A Schmidt; M Ek; J A Ferry; H G Muntz; J M Cain; H K Tamimi; D C Figge; B E Greer
Journal:  Gynecol Oncol       Date:  1994-09       Impact factor: 5.482

Review 9.  Endometrial cancer.

Authors:  Joel I Sorosky
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2008-02       Impact factor: 7.661

10.  Laparoscopy compared with laparotomy for comprehensive surgical staging of uterine cancer: Gynecologic Oncology Group Study LAP2.

Authors:  Joan L Walker; Marion R Piedmonte; Nick M Spirtos; Scott M Eisenkop; John B Schlaerth; Robert S Mannel; Gregory Spiegel; Richard Barakat; Michael L Pearl; Sudarshan K Sharma
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2009-10-05       Impact factor: 44.544

View more
  2 in total

1.  ESGO/ESTRO/ESP Guidelines for the management of patients with endometrial carcinoma.

Authors:  Nicole Concin; Carien L Creutzberg; Ignace Vergote; David Cibula; Mansoor Raza Mirza; Simone Marnitz; Jonathan A Ledermann; Tjalling Bosse; Cyrus Chargari; Anna Fagotti; Christina Fotopoulou; Antonio González-Martín; Sigurd F Lax; Domenica Lorusso; Christian Marth; Philippe Morice; Remi A Nout; Dearbhaile E O'Donnell; Denis Querleu; Maria Rosaria Raspollini; Jalid Sehouli; Alina E Sturdza; Alexandra Taylor; Anneke M Westermann; Pauline Wimberger; Nicoletta Colombo; François Planchamp; Xavier Matias-Guiu
Journal:  Virchows Arch       Date:  2021-02       Impact factor: 4.064

2.  Robotic interval debulking with radical hysterectomy and partial urinary bladder resection for locally advanced carcinosarcoma of the uterus.

Authors:  Justin Harold; Colleen Murphy; Joan Tymon-Rosario; Gulden Menderes
Journal:  Gynecol Oncol Rep       Date:  2022-03-16
  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.