Outcomes of minimally invasive surgery for patients with endometrial carcinoma involving the cervix

Abstract

Objective: Most studies evaluating the oncologic safety of minimally invasive surgery for endometrial cancer focus on patients with stage I disease. The aim of this study was to investigate the outcomes of minimally invasive surgery for patients with endometrial carcinoma involving the cervix.

Methods: Patients diagnosed between January 2010 and December 2015, with clinical stage II endometrial carcinoma, who underwent hysterectomy with lymphadenectomy, were drawn from the National Cancer Database. Inclusion criteria were clinical International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO 2009) stage II, patients who underwent hysterectomy with lymphadenectomy, and known route of surgery (open or minimally invasive). Patients who received radiation therapy prior to surgery, those who had subtotal/supracervical hysterectomy, or unknown type of hysterectomy were excluded. The exposure of interest was performance of minimally invasive surgery either laparoscopic or robotic-assisted. Overall survival (primary endpoint) was assessed for patients diagnosed between January 2010 and December 2014 following generation of Kaplan-Meier curves and compared with the log-rank test. A Cox model was constructed to control for confounders.

Results: A total of 2175 patients were identified and 1282 (58.9%) had minimally invasive surgery. Of these, 339 and 943 patients had laparoscopic or robotic-assisted laparoscopic hysterectomy, respectively. Minimally invasive surgery was converted to open surgery in 74 (5.8%) patients. Those undergoing minimally invasive surgery had shorter hospital stay (median 1 vs 3 days, p<0.001), lower unplanned readmission rate (2.7% vs 4.7%, p=0.014), and 90-day mortality (0.8% vs 1.8%, p=0.05). Patients who had open surgery (n=796) had worse overall survival compared with those who had minimally invasive surgery (n=1048, p=0.003); 3-year overall survival rates were 76.8% and 83.6%, respectively. After controlling for patient age, race, type of insurance, presence of co-morbidities, performance of extensive lymphadenectomy, presence of positive lymph nodes, tumor histology, presence of lymphovascular space invasion, tumor size, and administration of radiotherapy, performance of minimally invasive surgery was not associated with worse survival (HR 0.90, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.11).

Conclusions: In this retrospective analysis, minimally invasive surgery in patients with stage II endometrial carcinoma was associated with superior short-term peri-operative outcomes and improved 3-year overall survival.

Keywords: laparoscopes; laparotomy; uterine cancer.