Keywords
Hysterectomy
Laparoscopy
Local recurrence
Vaginal Dome
How to Cite
Abstract
Objective: To compare local recurrence rates (vaginal dome) in patients with endometrial cancer undergoing conventional (open) hysterectomy versus laparoscopic hysterectomy. Methods: Narrative review of the literature, based on clinical, cohort and multicenter studies, published in the period between 2018-2022.
Results: In the retrospective cohort and multicenter studies reviewed, local recurrence rates were similar between the groups of women with endometrial cancer, operated via laparotomy and via laparoscopy, showing that the occurrence is not associated with the surgical technique chosen for the treatment. Efficacy and safety of the laparoscopic procedure were associated with survival and morbidity rates only.
Conclusion: There is no difference in local recurrence rates (vaginal dome) after conventional (laparotomic) and laparoscopic endometrial cancer treatment.
References
Kim S, et al. Minimally invasive surgery for patients with advanced stage endometrial cancer. International Journal of Medical Sciences. 2021;18(5):1153-1158.
Monterossi G, et al. Minimally invasive approach in type II endometrial cancer: is it wise and safe? Jour Min Invasive Gynecol. 2017;24(3):438-445.
Dias M, et al. Perfil Epidemiológico das Mulheres com Câncer Ginecológico: um estudo multicasos, no Sul do Brasil. Braz Jour Develop. 2021;7(4):37025-37035.
Mouraz M, et al. Abordagem laparoscópica no estadiamento cirúrgico do carcinoma do endométrio. Rev Bras Ginecol Obstet. 2019;41(10):306-311.
Rütten H, et al. Recurrent Endometrial Cancer: Local and Systemic Treatment Options. Cancers. 2021;13(24):1-14.
Janda M, et al. Effect of total laparoscopic hysterectomy vs total abdominal hysterectomy on disease-free survival among women with stage I endometrial cancer: a randomized clinical trial. Jama. 2017;317(12):1224-1233.
Scaletta G, et al. Comparison of minimally invasive surgery with laparotomic approach in the treatment of high-risk endometrial cancer: A systematic review. Europ Jour Surgical Oncol. 2020;46(5):782-788.
Dai Y, Wang Z, Wang, J. Survival of microsatellite-stable endometrioid endometrial cancer patients after minimally invasive surgery: An analysis of the Cancer Genome Atlas data. Gynecol Oncol. 2020;158(1):92-98.
Padilla-Iserte P, et al. Impact of uterine manipulator on oncological outcome in endometrial cancer surgery. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2021;224(65):1-11.
Yin M, Cai Y, Zhou L. Identifying the superior surgical procedure for endometrial cancer: A protocol of network meta-analysis. Medicine. 2019;98(33):1-4.
Trigo AA; Guimarães NP, Silva GNA. Histerectomia: análise de dados comparativos entre técnicas videolaparoscópica e vaginal. Rev Elet Acer Med. 2022;8(4):1-16.
Gallotta V, et al. Minimally invasive salvage lymphadenectomy in gynecological cancer patients: a single institution series. Europ Jour Surgical Oncol. 2018;44(10):1568-1572.
Marconi MA, Lakatos EM. Fundamentos da metodologia científica. São Paulo: Atlas; 2017.
Ercole FF, Melo LS, Alcoforado CGC. Revisão integrativa versus revisão sistemática. Rev Min Enferm. 2018;18(1).
Hermont AP, Zina LG, Silva KD, Silva JM, Martins Júnior PA. Revisões integrativas: conceitos, planejamento e execução. Arq Odont. 2021; 57(1):3-7.
Seracchioli R, et al. Is total laparoscopic surgery for endometrial carcinoma at risk of local recurrence? A long-term survival. Anticancer Research. 2005;25(1):2423-2428.
Nezhat F, Yadav J, Rahaman J, Gretz H, Cohen C. Analysis of survival after laparoscopic management of endometrial cancer. Jour Min Invasive Gynecol. 2008;15(2):181-187.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.