Objective The aim of this study was to retrospectively compare in a series of 110 patients with early-stage endometrial cancer recurrence rate and surgical outcomes after total laparoscopic (LPS) hysterectomy with lymphadenectomy performed with or without uterine manipulator. Study design 110 patients with clinical stage I endometrial cancer were enrolled in a retrospective study and underwent surgical staging comprised of LPS hysterectomy, bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy, and in all cases we performed systematic bilateral pelvic lymphadenectomy with uterine manipulator (Group 1, 55 patients) or without (Group 2, 55 patients). Results The rate of positive cytology and LVSI did not significantly differ between Group 1 and Group 2. 1 patient of the Group 1 had a bladder injury and another patient of Group 2 had an ureteral stricture temporarily treated with a stent. 1 patient of the Group 1 had a bowel occlusion due to a port site hernia under the left 10 mm port, resolved with a bowel resection and an end-to-end anastomosis. In 1 patient of the Group 1 and 2 patients of Group 2 we observed a vaginal cuff dehiscence and in 1 case of Group 2 a pelvic lymphocyst was reported. Postoperative fever was reported in 3 patients of the Group 1 and in 5 patients of group 2 (p = 0.07). Conclusions Our study confirms that use of uterine manipulator for laparoscopic treatment of endometrial cancer does not increase positive peritoneal citology, LVSI and recurrence rate.

Laparoscopic treatment of early-stage endometrial cancer with and without uterine manipulator: Our experience and review of literature

ANGIONI, STEFANO;
2016-01-01

Abstract

Objective The aim of this study was to retrospectively compare in a series of 110 patients with early-stage endometrial cancer recurrence rate and surgical outcomes after total laparoscopic (LPS) hysterectomy with lymphadenectomy performed with or without uterine manipulator. Study design 110 patients with clinical stage I endometrial cancer were enrolled in a retrospective study and underwent surgical staging comprised of LPS hysterectomy, bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy, and in all cases we performed systematic bilateral pelvic lymphadenectomy with uterine manipulator (Group 1, 55 patients) or without (Group 2, 55 patients). Results The rate of positive cytology and LVSI did not significantly differ between Group 1 and Group 2. 1 patient of the Group 1 had a bladder injury and another patient of Group 2 had an ureteral stricture temporarily treated with a stent. 1 patient of the Group 1 had a bowel occlusion due to a port site hernia under the left 10 mm port, resolved with a bowel resection and an end-to-end anastomosis. In 1 patient of the Group 1 and 2 patients of Group 2 we observed a vaginal cuff dehiscence and in 1 case of Group 2 a pelvic lymphocyst was reported. Postoperative fever was reported in 3 patients of the Group 1 and in 5 patients of group 2 (p = 0.07). Conclusions Our study confirms that use of uterine manipulator for laparoscopic treatment of endometrial cancer does not increase positive peritoneal citology, LVSI and recurrence rate.
2016
Endometrial cancer, Hysterectomy, Laparoscopy, Lymphadenectomy, Manipulation, Manipulator
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
Tinelli Surg Oncol.pdf

Solo gestori archivio

Tipologia: versione editoriale (VoR)
Dimensione 888.58 kB
Formato Adobe PDF
888.58 kB Adobe PDF   Visualizza/Apri   Richiedi una copia

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11584/144394
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? 11
  • Scopus 37
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 35
social impact