Laparoscopic Surgery in Endometrial Carcinoma

Chapter

Abstract

Endometrial carcinoma is the most common gynecologic cancer in developed countries. The overall 5-year survival rate for patients diagnosed with this disease is estimated to be approximately 80%. The standard management of patients with early-stage endometrial cancer is total abdominal hysterectomy and bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy, with or without pelvic and para-aortic lymphadenectomy, depending on risk factors. The evolution of minimally invasive techniques, such as laparoscopy and robotic-assisted surgery, has established such approaches as the current standard of care. Among the proven benefits of the minimally invasive approach are lower rates of blood loss and transfusions, shorter length of stay, and lower rates of postoperative complications. In addition, a minimally invasive approach is equivalent in oncologic outcomes when compared to an open approach. Given these benefits, a laparoscopic or robotic approach should be the recommended surgical approach in the management of patients with early-stage endometrial cancer.

Keywords

Endometrial carcinoma Laparoscopic Minimally invasive surgery Robotic surgery Laparoscopic complications 

References

  1. 1.
    Siegel RL, Miller KD, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2016. CA Cancer J Clin. 2016;66(1):7–30.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Rodriguez M. Endometrial cancer: part 1—epidemiology, diagnosis and work-up. Menopause Manage. 2001;10:19–21.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Purdie DM, Green AC. Epidemiology of endometrial cancer. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 2001;15:341–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    German Working Group on Gynaecologic Oncology. Recommendations for diagnosis and treatment in patients with endometrial carcinoma. Zentralb Gynakol. 2002;1:58–62.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Morrow CP, Bundy BN, Kurman RJ, Creasman WT, Heller P, Homesley HD, et al. Relationship between surgical-pathological risk factors and outcome in clinical stage I and II carcinoma of the endometrium: a Gynecologic Oncology Group study. Gynecol Oncol. 1991;40:55–65.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Zaino RJ, Kurman R, Herbold D, Gliedman J, Bundy BN, Voet R, et al. The significance of squamous differentiation in endometrial carcinoma. Data from a Gynecologic Oncology Group study. Cancer. 1991;68:2293–302.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    He H, Zeng D, Ou H, Tang Y, et al. Laparoscopic treatment of endometrial cancer: systematic review. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2013;20:413–23.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Fram KM. Laparoscopically assisted vaginal hysterectomy versus abdominal hysterectomy in stage I endometrial cancer. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2002;12:57–61.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Zorlu CG, Simsek T, Seker Ari E. Laparoscopy or laparotomy for the management of endometrial cancer. JSLS. 2005;9:442–6.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Tozzi R, Malur S, Koehler C, Schnedider A. Laparoscopy versus laparotomy in endometrial cancer: first analysis of survival of a randomized prospective study. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2005;12:130–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Manzoni M, Tinelli R, Cosentino F, et al. Total laparoscopic hysterectomy versus abdominal hysterectomy with lymphadenectomy for early stage endometrial cancer: a prospective randomized controlled trial. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2009;200:296.e1–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kluivers KB, Florien A, Cate T, Bongers MY, Hans AM, et al. Total laparoscopic hysterectomy versus total abdominal hysterectomy with bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy for endometrial carcinoma: a randomized controlled trial with 5-year follow up. Gynecol Surg. 2011;8:427–34.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Walker JL, Piedmonte MR, Spirtos NM, et al. Laparoscopy compared with laparotomy for comprehensive surgical staging of uterine cancer: Gynecologic Oncology Group study LAP2. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27:5331.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Mourits MJ, Bijen CB, Arts HJ, et al. Safety of laparoscopy versus laparotomy in early-stage endometrial cancer: a randomized trial. Lancet Oncol. 2010;11:763.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Janda M, Gebski V, Brand A, et al. Quality of life after total laparoscopic hysterectomy versus total abdominal hysterectomy for stage I endometrial cancer (LACE): a randomized trial. Lancet Oncol. 2010;11:772.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Chandler JG, Corson SL, Way LW. Three spectra of laparoscopic entry access injuries. J Am Coll Surg. 2001;192:478.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Mayol J, Garcia-Aguilar J, Ortiz-Oshiro E, et al. Risks of the minimal access approach for laparoscopic surgery: multivariate analysis of morbidity related to umbilical trocar insertion. World J Surg. 1997;21:529.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Kavallaris A, Kalogiannidis I, Chalvatzas N, et al. Standardized technique of laparoscopic pelvic and para-aortic lymphadenectomy in gynecologic cancer optimizes the perioperative outcomes. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2011;283:1373.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Khoury-Collado F, Abu Rustum NR. Lymphatic mapping in endometrial cancer: a literature review of current techniques and results. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2008;18:1163–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Abu Rustum NR, Khoury-Collado F, Gemignani ML. Techniques of sentinel lymph node identification for early stage cervical and uterine cancer. Gynecol Oncol. 2008;111:S44–50.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Abu Rustum NR. Update on sentinel node mapping in uterine cancer: 10-year experience at Memorial Sloan -Kettering Cancer center. J Obstet Gynaecol. 2014;40(2):327–34.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Khoury-Collado F, Glaser GE, Zivanovic O, et al. Improving sentinel lymph node detection rates in endometrial cancer: how many cases are needed? Gynecol Oncol. 2009;115:453–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Kim CH, Barber EL, Khoury -Collado F, et al. Pathologic ultrastaging improves micrometastasis detection in sentinel lymph nodes during endometrial cancer staging. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2013;23:964–70.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Ogden CL, Carroll MD, Kit BK, Flegal KM, et al. Prevalence of childhood and adult obesity in the United States, 2011–2012. JAMA. 2014;311(8):806–14.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    DeSantis CE, Lin CC, Mariotto AB, Siegel RL, Stein KD, Kramer JL, et al. Cancer treatment and survivorship statistics, 2014. CA Cancer J Clin. 2014;64(4):252–71.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Tinelli R, Litta P, Meir Y, et al. Advantages of laparoscopy versus laparotomy in extremely obese women (BMI>35) with early-stage endometrial cancer: a multicenter study. Anticancer Res. 2014;34:2497–502.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Bouwman F, Smits A, Lopes A, Das N, Pollard A, et al. The impact of BMI on surgical complications and outcomes in endometrial cancer surgery. An institutional study and systematic review of the literature. Gynecol Oncol. 2015;139(2):369–76.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Zivanovic O, Sonoda Y, Diaz JP, et al. The rate of port-site metastases after 2251 laparoscopic procedures in women with underlying malignant disease. Gynecol Oncol. 2008;111(3):431–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Dobronte Z, Wittmann T, Karascony G. Rapid development of malignant metastases in the abdominal wall after laparoscopy. Endoscopy. 1978;10:127–30.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Ramirez PT, Frumovitz M, Wolf JK, Levenback C. Laparoscopic port-site metastases in patients with gynecological malignancies. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2004;14:1070–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Childers JM, Aqua KA, Surwit EA, Hallum AV, Hatch KD. Abdominal-wall tumor implantation after laparoscopy for malignant conditions. Obstet Gynecol. 1994;84:765–9.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Kruitwagen RF, Swinkels VM, Keyser KG, Doesburg WH, Schijf CP. Incidence and effect on survival of abdominal wall metastases at trocar or puncture sites following laparoscopy or paracentesis in women with ovarian cancer. Gynecol Oncol. 1996;60:233–7.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Abu-Rustum NR, et al. Subcutaneous tumor implantation after laparoscopic procedures in women with malignant disease. Obstet Gynecol. 2004;103:480–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Scalici J, Laughlin BB, Finan MA, Wang B, Rocconi RP. The trend towards minimally invasive surgery (MIS) for endometrial cancer: an ACS-NSQIP evaluation of surgical outcomes. Gynecol Oncol. 2015;136:512–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Gaia G, Holloway RW, Santoro L, et al. Robotic-assisted hysterectomy for endometrial cancer compared with traditional laparoscopic and laparotomy approaches: a systematic review. Obstet Gynecol. 2010;116(6):1422–31.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Chan JK, Gardner AB, Taylor K, Thompson CA, et al. Robotic versus laparoscopic versus open surgery in morbidly obese endometrial cancer patients. A comparative analysis of total charges and complication rates. Gynecol Oncol. 2015;139(2):300–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Park HK, Helenowski IB, Berry E, Lurain JR, Neubauer NL. A comparison of survival and recurrence outcomes in patients with endometrial cancer undergoing robotic versus open surgery. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2015;22(6):961–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Lu D, Liu Z, Shi G, et al. Robotic assisted surgery for gynaecological cancer. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012;1.Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Gala RB, Margulies R, Steinberg A, et al. Systematic review of robotic surgery in gynecology: robotic techniques compared with laparoscopy and laparotomy. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2014;21:353–61.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Ran L, Jin J, Xu Y, et al. Comparison of robotic surgery with laparoscopy and laparotomy for treatment of endometrial cancer: a meta-analysis. PLoS One. 2014;9:e108361.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Wright JD, Ananth CV, Tergas AI, et al. An economic analysis of robotically assisted hysterectomy. Obstet Gynecol. 2014;123:1038–48.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Leitao MM Jr, Bartashnik A, Wagner I, et al. Cost-effectiveness analysis of robotically assisted laparoscopy for newly diagnosed uterine cancers. Obstet Gynecol. 2014;123:1031–7.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of SurgeryMemorial Sloan Kettering Cancer CenterNew YorkUSA
  2. 2.Department of Gynecology Oncology and Reproductive MedicineThe University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer CenterHoustonUSA

Personalised recommendations