Should laparoscopy be revisited in the management of stage II endometrial cancer in the post-LACC era?

Abstract

Background: A recent randomized trial showed that laparoscopy had poorer outcomes compared with open surgery for early-stage cervical cancer. Whether this is of concern in endometrial cancer, when the cervix is involved has received little attention. This study aimed to investigate whether there is any difference on overall and cancer specific survival between patients treated with laparoscopy and laparotomy for stage II endometrial cancer.

Methods: Data from patients with histologically proven stage II endometrial cancer who were treated between 2010 and 2019 in a single cancer center were reviewed. Demographic, histopathological characteristics and treatment modalities were recorded. Recurrence rate, cancer specific and overall survival were compared between patients that were treated with laparoscopic and open surgery.

Results: From 47 patients with stage II disease, 33 (70%) were treated with laparoscopy and 14 (30%) with open surgery. There was no difference on age (P=0.86), BMI (P=0.76), Comorbidity Index Score (P=0.96), upstaging/upgrading after surgery (P=0.41), performance of lymphadenectomy (P=0.74), histological type (P=0.32), LVSI (P=0.15), depth of myometrial invasion (P=0.07), postoperative hospital stay (P=0.18) and administration of adjuvant treatment (P=0.11) between the two groups. Recurrence rate (P=0.756), overall (P=0.606) and cancer specific survival (P=0.564) were also comparable between laparoscopy and laparotomy groups.

Conclusions: Laparoscopic and open surgery seem to have comparable outcomes for stage II endometrial cancer. The oncological safety of laparoscopy for stage II endometrial cancer should be further investigated with a randomized controlled trial.