Objective Endometrial cancer is the most common gynecologic neoplasm. To date, international guidelines recommend sentinel lymph node biopsy for low-risk neoplasms, while systematic lymphadenectomy is still considered for high-risk cases. This study aimed to compare the long-term survival of high-risk patients who were submitted to sentinel lymph node biopsy alone versus systematic pelvic lymphadenectomy.

Methods Patients with high-risk endometrial cancer according to the 2021 European Society of Gynaecological Oncology/European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology/European Society of Pathology risk classification were retrospectively analyzed. The primary aim of the study was to compare the long-term overall survival and disease-free survival of high-risk endometrial cancer patients undergoing sentinel lymph node biopsy versus systematic lymphadenectomy. A supplementary post-hoc survival analysis of cases with nodal metastasis was performed to compare sentinel lymph node and lymphadenectomy survival outcomes in this subset of patients.

Results The study enrolled 237 patients with histologically proven high-risk endometrial cancer. Patients were followed up for a median of 31 months (IQR 18–40). During the follow-up, 38 (16.0%) patients had a recurrence, and 19 (8.0%) patients died. Disease-free survival (85.2% vs 82.8%; p=0.74) and overall survival (91.3% vs 92.6%; p=0.62) were not different between the sentinel lymph node alone and lymphadenectomy groups. Furthermore, neither overall survival (96.1% vs 91.4%; p=0.43) nor disease-free survival (83.7% vs 76.4%; p=0.46) were different among sentinel lymph node alone and lymphadenectomy groups in patients with nodal metastasis.

Conclusions Sentinel lymph node mapping alone in high-risk endometrial cancer appears to be an oncologically safe technique over a long observational time. Systematic lymphadenectomy in this population does not offer a survival advantage.