Literature DB >> 29887689

Prospective Nonrandomized Comparative Study of Laparoscopic Versus Open Surgical Staging for Endometrial Cancer in India.

Vikash Mahajan1.   

Abstract

Laparoscopic procedures to treat endometrial cancer are currently emerging. At present, we have evidence to do laparoscopic oncologic resections for endometrial cancer as proven by many prospective studies from abroad such as LAP2 by GOG. So, we have decided to assess the safety and feasibility of such a study in our population with the following as our primary objectives: (1) to study whether laparoscopy is better compared to open approach in terms of duration of hospital stay, perioperative morbidity and early recovery from surgical trauma and (2) to study whether the laparoscopic approach is noninferior to the open approach in terms of number of lymph nodes harvested in lymphadenectomy and rate of conversion to open surgery. We did a prospective nonrandomized comparative study of open versus laparoscopy approach for surgical staging of endometrial cancer from 16th May 2013 to 15th May 2015. To prove a significant difference in the hospital stay, we needed 29 patients in each arm. Thirty patients in each arm were enrolled for the study. The median duration of stay in the open arm was 7 days and in the laparoscopy arm it was 5 days. The advantage of 2 days in the laparoscopic arm was statistically significant (P value 0.006). Forty percent of patients in the open arm had to stay in the hospital for more than 7 days whereas only 3% of patients in the laparoscopy arm required to stay for more than 7 days (P value 0.001). This difference was statistically significant. There was no significant difference between the early complication rates between the two arms (20% in open vs. 13% in laparoscopy; P value 0.730). There was a conversion rate of 10% in laparoscopy. The median number of nodes harvested in open arm was 16.50 and in the laparoscopy arm, it was 13.50. The difference was not statistically significant (P value 0.086). Laparoscopy approach for endometrial cancer staging is feasible in Indian patients and the short-term advantages are replicable with same oncologic safety as proved by randomized controlled trials.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Endometrial cancer; Hystrectomy; India; Laparoscopy; Lymphadenectomy; Surgical staging

Year:  2017        PMID: 29887689      PMCID: PMC5984840          DOI: 10.1007/s13193-017-0633-6

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Indian J Surg Oncol        ISSN: 0975-7651


  11 in total

1.  Surgical stage I endometrial cancer: predictors of distant failure and death.

Authors:  Andrea Mariani; Maurice J Webb; Gary L Keeney; Timothy G Lesnick; Karl C Podratz
Journal:  Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2002-12       Impact factor: 5.482

Review 2.  Laparoscopic and laparotomic approaches for endometrial cancer treatment: a comprehensive review.

Authors:  Ingolf Juhasz-Böss; Hisham Haggag; Sascha Baum; Stephanie Kerl; Achim Rody; Erich Solomayer
Journal:  Arch Gynecol Obstet       Date:  2012-02-25       Impact factor: 2.344

3.  Surgical pathologic spread patterns of endometrial cancer. A Gynecologic Oncology Group Study.

Authors:  W T Creasman; C P Morrow; B N Bundy; H D Homesley; J E Graham; P B Heller
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  1987-10-15       Impact factor: 6.860

Review 4.  Safety of laparoscopy vs laparotomy in the surgical staging of endometrial cancer: a systematic review and metaanalysis of randomized controlled trials.

Authors:  Fulvio Zullo; Angela Falbo; Stefano Palomba
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2012-01-13       Impact factor: 8.661

5.  Hospital-based study of endometrial cancer survival in Mumbai, India.

Authors:  Ganesh Balasubramaniam; S Sushama; B Rasika; U Mahantshetty
Journal:  Asian Pac J Cancer Prev       Date:  2013

6.  Improved surgical safety after laparoscopic compared to open surgery for apparent early stage endometrial cancer: results from a randomised controlled trial.

Authors:  Andreas Obermair; Monika Janda; Jannah Baker; Srinivas Kondalsamy-Chennakesavan; Alison Brand; Russell Hogg; Thomas W Jobling; Russell Land; Tom Manolitsas; Marcelo Nascimento; Deborah Neesham; James L Nicklin; Martin K Oehler; Geoff Otton; Lewis Perrin; Stuart Salfinger; Ian Hammond; Yee Leung; Peter Sykes; Hextan Ngan; Andrea Garrett; Michael Laney; Tong Yow Ng; Karfai Tam; Karen Chan; David H Wrede; Selvan Pather; Bryony Simcock; Rhonda Farrell; Gregory Robertson; Graeme Walker; Anthony McCartney; Val Gebski
Journal:  Eur J Cancer       Date:  2012-05       Impact factor: 9.162

7.  Survival after relapse in patients with endometrial cancer: results from a randomized trial.

Authors:  Carien L Creutzberg; Wim L J van Putten; Peter C Koper; Marnix L M Lybeert; Jan J Jobsen; Carla C Wárlám-Rodenhuis; Karin A J De Winter; Ludy C H W Lutgens; Alfons C M van den Bergh; Elzbieta van der Steen-Banasik; Henk Beerman; Mat van Lent
Journal:  Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2003-05       Impact factor: 5.482

8.  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

9.  Laparoscopically assisted surgical staging (LASS) of endometrial cancer.

Authors:  J M Childers; P R Brzechffa; K D Hatch; E A Surwit
Journal:  Gynecol Oncol       Date:  1993-10       Impact factor: 5.482

10.  Differences in Epidural and Analgesic Use in Patients with Apparent Stage I Endometrial Cancer Treated by Open versus Laparoscopic Surgery: Results from the Randomised LACE Trial.

Authors:  Jannah Baker; Monika Janda; David Belavy; Andreas Obermair
Journal:  Minim Invasive Surg       Date:  2013-07-14
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.