<h4>Objective</h4>The aim of this study is to analyze and draw the potential differences between the robotic-assisted surgery (RS) and the laparoscopy (LPS) in endometrial cancer staging.<h4>Methods</h4>In this single-institution retrospective study we enrolled 1,221 consecutive clinical stage I-III endometrial cancer patients undergone minimally invasive surgical staging. We compared patients treated by LPS and by RS, on the basis of perioperative and oncological outcomes (disease-free survival [DFS] and overall survival [OS]). A sub-analysis of the high-risk endometrial cancer population was performed in the 2 cohorts.<h4>Results</h4>The 2 cohorts (766 treated by LPS and 455 by RS) were homogeneous in terms of perioperative and pathological data. We recorded differences in number of relapse/progression (11.7% in LPS vs. 7% in RS, p=0.008) and in number of deaths (9.8% in LPS vs. 4.8% in RS, p=0.002). Whereas, univariate and multivariate analyses according to DFS and OS confirmed that the surgical approach did not influence the DFS or the OS. In the multivariable analysis the association of the age and grading was significant for DFS and OS. In the sub-analysis of the 426 high risk EC patients (280 in LPS and 146 in RS) the univariate and the multivariate confirmed the influence of the age in DFS and OS, independently of the minimally invasive approach.<h4>Conclusions</h4>In our large retrospective analysis, we confirmed that the RS and LPS have similar efficacy and safety for endometrial cancer staging also for the high-risk endometrial cancer patients.
J Gynecol Oncol (Journal of gynecologic oncology)
Cited: 0 times