Introduction/Background In this study we aimed to compare the long-term oncological outcomes of laparotomy (LT) and laparoscopic (LS) surgeries in endometrial cancer under the light of 2016 ESMO-ESGO-ESTRO risk classification system, focusing on the high intermediate and high-risk categories.
Methodology Using multicentric database, overall (OS) and disease-free survivals (DFS) of 2745 endometrial cancer cases were compared according the surgery route, laparotomy vs laparoscopy. A sub-analysis was performed considering the 2016 ESMO-ESGO-ESTRO risk classification for endometrial cancer. Thus, high intermediate and high-risk patients were grouped and a comparison was made between the groups.
Results Among the enrolled patients 1743 (63.5%) were operated by laparotomy and 1002 (36.5%) were operated with laparoscopy. The total number of high intermediate and high-risk endometrial cancer cases was 734 (45%) patients in the LT group and 307 (30.7%) patients in the LS group. OS and DFS were not statistically different when compared between LS and LT groups in terms of low, intermediate, high intermediate and high-risk endometrial cancer.
Conclusion Regardless of the endometrial cancer risk category, long-term oncologic outcomes of LS were found to be comparable to those treated classically with LT. Our results are encouraging for primarily considering laparoscopic surgery for high intermediate and high-risk endometrial cancer cases in order to minimize surgical morbidity, as adjuvant therapies will mostly be offered to this population. It should be strongly emphasized that this suggestion is limited to gynecological oncology centers with high laparoscopical experience.
Disclosure Nothing to disclose.
Statistics from Altmetric.com
If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.