Oncologic and perioperative outcomes of robot-assisted versus conventional laparoscopy for the treatment of clinically uterine-confined high-grade adenocarcinoma Journal Article


Authors: Dagher, C.; Lim, Y. H.; Sonoda, Y.; Marshall, L.; Long Roche, K.; Jewell, E.; Chi, D. S.; Gardner, G.; Broach, V.; Mueller, J. J.; Abu-Rustum, N. R.; Leitao, M. M. Jr
Article Title: Oncologic and perioperative outcomes of robot-assisted versus conventional laparoscopy for the treatment of clinically uterine-confined high-grade adenocarcinoma
Abstract: Objective: The aim of this study was to compare oncologic and perioperative outcomes of robot-assisted laparoscopy (RA) and conventional laparoscopy (LSC) in apparent clinically uterine-confined, high-grade adenocarcinoma. Methods: A retrospective review was conducted to identify patients with newly diagnosed high-grade uterine adenocarcinoma treated at our institution between 1 January 2009 and 30 June 2021. Exclusion criteria included bulky extrauterine disease, no lymph node assessment, or synchronous tumors. Clinicopathologic details were obtained from medical records. Postoperative complications were classified using the Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center Surgical Secondary Events system, and statistical analysis was performed using appropriate tests. Results: Of 901 patients identified, 748 (83%) underwent RA and 153 (17%) underwent LSC. Median age was 65 years (range 25–92) and median body mass index was 30 kg/m2 (range 15–60). Overall, 650 patients (72%) had 2009 International Federation of Obstetrics and Gynecology (FIGO) stage I disease. Forty-one patients (4.6%) converted to laparotomy—26 (3.5%) from RA versus 15 (9.8%) from LSC (p = 0.02). Postoperative complications occurred in 81 patients (9.0%), with no significant differences in type or rate between groups. Median operative time was 192 mins (range 88–936) for RA versus 168 mins (range 90–372) for LSC (p = 0.002). Median follow-up was 52 months (range 1–163) for RA and 66 months (range 7–165) for LSC. Four-year progression-free survival (PFS) and disease-specific survival (DSS) were similar between groups. Multivariate analysis showed stage, histology, peritoneal cytology, and lymphovascular invasion predicated a decrease in PFS and DSS. Conclusions: RA demonstrated comparable oncologic outcomes to LSC in patients with high-grade endometrial carcinoma, with no significant difference in postoperative complications or long-term survival. © Society of Surgical Oncology 2024.
Keywords: survival; adult; controlled study; human tissue; treatment outcome; aged; aged, 80 and over; middle aged; cancer surgery; survival rate; retrospective studies; major clinical study; mortality; cancer adjuvant therapy; cancer radiotherapy; comparative study; postoperative care; cancer staging; follow up; follow-up studies; antineoplastic agent; hysterectomy; laparoscopy; cancer grading; endometrium cancer; laparoscopic surgery; laparotomy; sentinel lymph node; adenocarcinoma; progression free survival; pathology; medical record review; retrospective study; postoperative complication; postoperative complications; body mass; statistical analysis; operation duration; surgery; intermethod comparison; minimally invasive surgery; hospital readmission; uterine neoplasms; disease specific survival; ascites fluid cytology; perioperative complications; uterus tumor; procedures; para-aortic lymphadenectomy; neoplasm grading; lymph vessel metastasis; very elderly; humans; prognosis; human; female; article; robotic surgical procedures; robot assisted surgery; high-grade endometrial adenocarcinoma; robot-assisted laparoscopy; uterine adenocarcinoma
Journal Title: Annals of Surgical Oncology
Volume: 31
Issue: 13
ISSN: 1068-9265
Publisher: Springer  
Date Published: 2024-12-01
Start Page: 8934
End Page: 8943
Language: English
DOI: 10.1245/s10434-024-16029-7
PUBMED: 39317893
PROVIDER: scopus
PMCID: PMC12044547
DOI/URL:
Notes: Article -- MSK Cancer Center Support Grant (P30 CA008748) acknowledged in PubMed and PDF -- MSK corresponding author is Mario Leitao Jr -- Source: Scopus
Altmetric
Citation Impact
BMJ Impact Analytics
MSK Authors
  1. Ginger J Gardner
    270 Gardner
  2. Elizabeth Jewell
    131 Jewell
  3. Dennis S Chi
    707 Chi
  4. Yukio Sonoda
    472 Sonoda
  5. Mario Leitao
    575 Leitao
  6. Jennifer Jean Mueller
    186 Mueller
  7. Vance Andrew Broach
    115 Broach
  8. Christian Dagher
    26 Dagher
  9. Yu Hui Lim
    3 Lim