Laparoscopic radical parametrectomy and partial vaginectomy for recurrent endometrial cancer

Robotic-assisted laparoscopic colpectomy combined with a hysterectomy and bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy versus a vaginal colpectomy in trans masculine individuals

Background: Colpectomy entails the surgical removal of the vaginal epithelium. It may be performed in trans-masculine individuals as gender-affirming surgery. Vaginal colpectomy is a complex procedure with potentially severe complications. As alternative, robotic-assisted laparoscopic colpectomy combined with robotic-assisted laparoscopic hysterectomy and possible bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy (RAC+) can be performed. Aim: To compare surgical outcomes of robotic-assisted colpectomy combined with a hysterectomy and bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy with a vaginal colpectomy after previous hysterectomy in trans masculine patients. Methods: A single-center retrospective cohort study included 310 transgender men who underwent either robotic-assisted colpectomy combined with a hysterectomy and bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy (RAC+) (n = 140) or vaginal colpectomy (n = 170) between January 2006 and December 2019. Surgical details and clinical outcomes were collected from all patients. Results: The median intra-operative blood loss was 100 mL (50-200) in RAC + and 300 mL (200-450) in vaginal colpectomy (p < 0.01). The median duration of hospital stay was 2 days (1-2) in the RAC + group and 3 days (2-4) in the vaginal group (p < 0.01). In the RAC + group 63 (45%) peri-operative complications were reported, compared to 93 (54.7%) in the vaginal group [OR 0.7 (0.4-1.1)]. The main difference was found in intra-operative complications (RAC+ 0.7% vs. vaginal 10.6%). Furthermore, the total number of complications graded 3a and higher was significantly lower in the RAC + group [OR 0.3 (0.2-0.7)]. Conclusion: Although RAC + entailed a more extensive procedure, compared to vaginal colpectomy, RAC + had a lower risk of severe peri-operative complications, requiring re-intervention; intra-operative blood loss was lower and hospital stay shorter. Both routes of colpectomy are complex procedures with potentially severe complications. Future studies are needed to study whether robot-colpectomy could be a safe alternative to vaginal colpectomy in patients with a previous hysterectomy.

ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Management of Recurrent Endometrial Cancer

OBJECTIVES

In women with endometrial carcinoma (EC), tumor recurrences tend to occur in the 2- to 3-year period following surgical staging. Management of disease recurrence in EC poses significant challenges. These patients represent a heterogenous group where histologic subtypes, previous adjuvant management, interval since completion of adjuvant therapy, and size and site(s) of disease recurrence all have important implications on salvage therapies and prognosis. No randomized controlled trials have been published to determine optimal management in this group of patients. An expert panel was convened to reach consensus on the most appropriate management options in this group of patients.

METHODS

The American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed annually by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and revision include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer reviewed journals and the application of well-established methodologies (RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation or GRADE) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures for specific clinical scenarios. In those instances where evidence is lacking or equivocal, expert opinion may supplement the available evidence to recommend imaging or treatment.

RESULTS

Five clinical variants were developed to address common scenarios in the management of women with recurrent EC. Group members reached consensus on the appropriateness of specific evaluation and treatment approaches with numerical ratings.

CONCLUSIONS

In combining available medical literature and expert opinions, this manuscript may serve as an aid for other practitioners in the appropriate management of women with recurrent EC.

A comparison of laparoscopic and abdominal radical parametrectomy for cervical or vaginal apex carcinoma and stage II endometrial cancer after hysterectomy

The authors conclude that laparoscopic radical parametrectomy is superior to abdominal parametrectomy in terms of shorter operative time, less blood loss, and shorter hospital stay.

Background and Objective:

Radical parametrectomy (RP), performed either abdominally (ARP) or laparoscopically (LRP), is a viable alternative to radiotherapy in treating invasive cervical cancer, vaginal apex cancer, and endometrial cancer that is more advanced than initially suspected after hysterectomy. We carried out a comparative study on intra- and postoperative parameters between the two performed by similarly experienced surgeons.

Methods:

Forty consecutive patients indicative for RP were reviewed: 22 and 18 underwent ARP and LRP, respectively. Information was collected on demographics, indications for initial and this surgery, tumor characteristics, intra- and postoperative parameters, and complications. The lengths of resected parametrial and vaginal tissues were measured.

Results:

Compared with ARP, LRP resulted in shorter operative time (200 vs 239 min), less blood loss (627.8 vs 929.5 mL), shorter hospital stay (16.8 vs 19.9 days), and removal of more pelvic lymph nodes (27.4 ± 5.9 vs 23.1 ± 7.1). Although it was not attempted in ARP to remove lymph nodes in the deep obturator space, it was attempted in LRP and one positive node was found. In the ARP cohort there was one case of injury to the small intestine during surgery, whereas in LRP there was one instance of lower urologic fistula after surgery.

Conclusion:

LRP is superior to ARP in terms of shorter operative time, less blood loss, and shorter hospital stay while still maintaining the completeness of the procedure. It can be safely performed in the hands of experienced surgeons for cervical or vaginal apex carcinoma and stage II endometrial cancer after hysterectomy.

Minimally invasive surgical approach for treatment of isolated endometrial cancer recurrence in an ultra-morbidly obese patient

Herein is reported the first published case of an ultra-morbidly obese woman affected by an isolated pelvic recurrence of endometrial cancer, which was successfully treated via minimally invasive vaginal excision.

Robotic surgery for cervical cancer

The development of robotic technology has facilitated the application of minimally invasive techniques for the treatment and evaluation of patients with early, advanced, and recurrent cervical cancer. The application of robotic technology for selected patients with cervical cancer and the data available in the literature are addressed in the present review paper. The robotic radical hysterectomy technique developed at the Mayo Clinic Arizona is presented with data comparing 27 patients who underwent the robotic procedure with 2 matched groups of patients treated by laparoscopic (N = 31), and laparotomic radical hysterectomy (N = 35). A few other studies confirmed the feasibility and safety of robotic radical hysterectomy and comparisons to either to the laparoscopic or open approach were discussed. Based on data from the literature, minimally invasive techniques including laparoscopy and robotics are preferable to laparotomy for patients requiring radical hysterectomy, with some advantages noted for robotics over laparoscopy. A prospective randomised trial is currently being performed under the auspices of the American Association of Gyneoclogic Laparoscopists comparing minimally invasive radical hysterectomy (laparoscopy or robotics) with laparotomy. For early cervical cancer radical parametrectomy and fertility preserving trachelectomy have been performed using robotic technology and been shown to be feasible, safe, and easier to perform when compared to the laparoscopic approach. Similar benefits have been noted in the treatment of advanced and recurrent cervical cancer where complex procedures such as extraperitoneal paraortic lymphadenectomy and pelvic exenteration have been required.

CONCLUSION

Robotic technology better facilitates the surgical approach as compared to laparoscopy for technically challenging operations performed to treat primary, early or advanced, and recurrent cervical cancer. Although patient advantages are similar or slightly improved with robotics, there are multiple advantages for surgeons.