Trends and survival outcomes of robotic, laparoscopic, and open surgery for stage II uterine cancer

Current analysis of the survival implications for minimally invasive surgery in the treatment of early-stage cervix cancer

Early-stage cervical cancer (ESCC) is managed with radical hysterectomy, a procedure that can be performed either via open surgery or minimally invasive surgery (MIS), the latter of which is accomplished via traditional laparoscopy or robotic-assisted surgery. Previously, MIS was routinely incorporated into the management of ESCC due to the approach's reduced operative morbidity and truncated hospital stay duration, but more recent clinical evidence has since impugned the efficacy of MIS because of the reportedly inferior disease-free survival and overall survival outcomes compared to open surgery. However, additional studies have documented equivalent outcomes among the various surgical modalities, suggesting further exploration of clinical factors as we endeavor to conclusively determine the standard of care for patients diagnosed with ESCC.

A systematic review of full economic evaluations of robotic-assisted surgery in thoracic and abdominopelvic procedures

This study aims to conduct a systematic review of full economic analyses of robotic-assisted surgery (RAS) in adults' thoracic and abdominopelvic indications. Authors used Medline, EMBASE, and PubMed to conduct a systematic review following the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) 2020 guidelines. Fully published economic articles in English were included. Methodology and reporting quality were assessed using standardized tools. Majority of studies (28/33) were on oncology procedures. Radical prostatectomy was the most reported procedure (16/33). Twenty-eight studies used quality-adjusted life years, and five used complication rates as outcomes. Nine used primary and 24 studies used secondary data. All studies used modeling. In 81% of studies (27/33), RAS was cost-effective or potentially cost-effective compared to comparator procedures, including radical prostatectomy, nephrectomy, and cystectomy. Societal perspective, longer-term time-horizon, and larger volumes favored RAS. Cost-drivers were length of stay and equipment cost. From societal and payer perspectives, robotic-assisted surgery is a cost-effective strategy for thoracic and abdominopelvic procedures.Clinical trial registration This study is a systematic review with no intervention, not a clinical trial.

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

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.

Robotic-assisted gynecologic surgery associated tympanic membrane perforation: A report of two cases and review of the literature

Robotic gynecologic surgery is associated with the use of steep Trendelenburg positioning. Steep Trendelenburg is necessary to provide optimal exposure to the pelvis but is associated with an increased risk of non-surgical complications such as suboptimal ventilation, facial and laryngeal edema, increased intraocular and intracranial pressure as well as neurologic injury. Several case reports have described otorrhagia after robotic assisted surgery; however, there are limited reports on the risk of tympanic membrane perforation. To our knowledge, there are no published reports on tympanic membrane perforation in gynecologic nor gynecologic oncology surgery. We report two cases of perioperative tympanic membrane rupture and bloody otorrhagia associated with robot-assisted gynecologic surgery. In both cases otolaryngology/Ear Nose and Throat (ENT) was consulted, and the perforations resolved with conservative management.

Uterine Neoplasms, Version 1.2023, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology

Adenocarcinoma of the endometrium (also known as endometrial cancer, or more broadly as uterine cancer or carcinoma of the uterine corpus) is the most common malignancy of the female genital tract in the United States. It is estimated that 65,950 new uterine cancer cases will have occurred in 2022, with 12,550 deaths resulting from the disease. Endometrial carcinoma includes pure endometrioid cancer and carcinomas with high-risk endometrial histology (including uterine serous carcinoma, clear cell carcinoma, carcinosarcoma [also known as malignant mixed Müllerian tumor], and undifferentiated/dedifferentiated carcinoma). Stromal or mesenchymal sarcomas are uncommon subtypes accounting for approximately 3% of all uterine cancers. This selection from the NCCN Guidelines for Uterine Neoplasms focuses on the diagnosis, staging, and management of pure endometrioid carcinoma. The complete version of the NCCN Guidelines for Uterine Neoplasms is available online at NCCN.org.

Comparison of Minimally Invasive Versus Abdominal Radical Hysterectomy for Early-Stage Cervical Cancer: An Updated Meta-Analysis

Background

Although minimally invasive surgery (MIS) was commonly used to treat patients with early-stage cervical cancer, its efficacy remained controversial.

Methods

We systematically searched PubMed, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases until March 2021 to compare the prognosis of early-stage cervical cancer patients who underwent MIS (laparoscopic or robot-assisted radical hysterectomy) or ARH. The primary outcomes included rates of 3- and 5-year disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS). The study protocol was registered in PROSPERO: CRD42021258116.

Results

This meta-analysis included 48 studies involving 23346 patients (11220, MIS group; 12126, ARH group). The MIS group had a poorer medium-term (3-year) DFS (HR=1.08, 95% CI: 1.01-1.16, p=0.031) than the ARH group, without significant difference in medium-term OS as well as long-term (5-year) DFS and OS. Subgroup analysis of 3-year prognosis revealed that although patients in Western countries who underwent MIS had shorter DFS than those who underwent ARH (HR=1.10, p=0.024), no difference was observed in DFS among those in Asian countries. Moreover, MIS was linked to poorer 3-year DFS in patients with stage I cervical cancer (HR=1.07, p=0.020). Notably, subgroup analysis of 5-year prognosis revealed that patients with tumor size ≥2 cm undergoing MIS exhibited a shorter DFS than those who underwent ARH (HR=1.65, p=0.041).

Conclusion

Patients with early-stage cervical cancer undergoing MIS may have a poorer prognosis than those undergoing ARH. Therefore, applying MIS in early-stage cervical cancer patients should be conducted with caution.

Systematic Review Registration

The study protocol was registered in PROSPERO: CRD42021258116.