Survival Analysis in Endometrial Carcinomas by Type of Surgical Approach: A Matched-Pair Study.

(1) Background: This study aimed to analyze the impact of surgical approach on survival rates in women diagnosed with endometrial cancer. (2) Methods: A retrospective multicenter cohort of 1382 women diagnosed with EC was performed. A total of 684 (49.5%) women underwent minimally invasive surgery, 233 (34%) underwent robotic-assisted laparoscopy (RAL), 451 (66%) underwent conventional laparoscopy (LPS), and 698 (50.5%) underwent open surgery (OP). Sociodemographic features, tumor characteristics, and survival rates were analyzed in the whole sample and in a matched-pair model. (3) Results: Women operated on by OP were significantly older, presented more comorbidities, and had more aggressive tumors. Disease-free (DFS), overall (OS), and specific survival related to EC (SS) amounts were significantly higher for MIS compared to OP (p < 0.001). When matched by age, body mass index, comorbidities, ASA score, histological type, grade, myometrial invasion, and FIGO stage, 798 patients were selected. DFS, OS, and SS amounts were similar between the MIS and OP groups. (4) Conclusions: The surgical approach for women with EC does not impact DFS or OS amounts when matched by homogeneous groups.

Long term COST-minimization analysis of robot-assisted hysterectomy versus conventional laparoscopic hysterectomy.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study is to carry out the economic evaluation, in term of a cost-minimization analysis that considers healthcare costs and indirect costs, of robot-assisted hysterectomy (RAH) compared with conventional laparoscopic hysterectomy (CLH) in female adults scheduled for total laparoscopic hysterectomy for benign conditions. METHODS: Cost-minimization analysis based on an analytic observational study of prospective cohorts with a five-year time horizon. Eligible participants were all female adults scheduled for total laparoscopic hysterectomy for benign conditions at tertiary hospital. The economic evaluation was conducted from a Spanish National Health Service and societal perspective, including healthcare costs and indirect costs. The costs are expressed in Euros from the year 2015. RESULTS: One hundred sixty nine patients were analyzed, 68 in the RAH group and 101 in the CLH group. Average cost for the RAH group was €8982.42 compared to €8015.14 for the CLH group (incremental cost €967.27; p = 0.054). Healthcare cost is the most important component of total cost and represents 86.4% for the RAH group and 82.3% for the CLH group. The difference of €1169 (p = 0.01) in the average healthcare cost is mainly due to the cost of purchasing and maintaining the equipment (difference of €1206.39 in favor of RAH; p < 0.005). With regard to indirect costs, for patients in the RAH group the costs associated with loss of productivity were lower (difference of €203.42; p = 0.17), while the cost of trips to the hospital was higher (difference of €1.98; p = 0.66) in respect to CLH. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings reveal similar effectiveness between RAH and CLH, although CLH is the more efficient option from the point of view of an economic analysis based on cost-minimization.

Role of lymphadenectomy in intermediate-risk endometrial cancer: a matched-pair study.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the impact of lymph node dissection (LND) on morbidity, survival, and cost for intermediate-risk endometrial cancers (IREC). METHODS: A multicenter retrospective cohort of 720 women with IREC (endometrioid histology with myometrial invasion <50% and grade 3; or myometrial invasion ≥50% and grades 1-2; or cervical involvement and grades 1-2) was carried out. All patients underwent hysterectomy and bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy. A matched pair analysis identified 178 pairs (178 with LND and 178 without it) equal in age, body mass index, co-morbidities, American Society of Anesthesiologist score, myometrial invasion, and surgical approach. Demographic data, pathology results, perioperative morbidity, and survival were abstracted from medical records. Disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) was analyzed using Kaplan-Meier curves and multivariate Cox regression analysis. Cost analysis was carried out between both groups. RESULTS: Both study groups were homogeneous in demographic data and pathologic results. The mean follow-up in patients free of disease was 61.7 months (range, 12.0-275.5). DFS (hazard ratio [HR]=1.34; 95% confidence interval [CI]=0.79-2.28) and OS (HR=0.72; 95% CI=0.42-1.23) were similar in both groups, independently of nodes count. In LND group, positive nodes were found in 10 cases (5.6%). Operating time and late postoperative complications were higher in LND group (p<0.05). Infection rate was significantly higher in no-LND group (p=0.035). There were no statistical differences between both groups regarding operative morbidity and hospital stay. The global cost was similar for both groups. CONCLUSION: Systematic LND in IREC has no benefit on survival, although it does not show an increase in perioperative morbidity or global cost.

Impact of the lymphadenectomy in high-risk histologic types of endometrial cancer: a matched-pair study.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to assess the impact of lymphadenectomy (LND) on morbidity, survival, and cost for high-risk histologic types of endometrial cancer (EC). MATERIALS AND METHODS: We analyzed a multicenter retrospective cohort of 389 women with high-risk histotypes of EC (poor differenced tumors [G3], clear cell, serous papillary, and mixed mesodermal tumors) preoperatively confined to the corpus and diagnosed between 2000 and 2013. All patients underwent hysterectomy and bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy. A matched-pair analysis identified 97 pairs (97 with LDN and 97 without) equal in age, body mass index, comorbidities, International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics stage, and adjuvant treatment. Demographic data, pathologic examination results, perioperative morbidity, and survival were abstracted from medical records. Cost was provided by the cost unit of the local hospital. Disease-free and overall survival were analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox multivariable regression analysis. RESULTS: Both study groups were homogeneous in demographic data and pathologic examination results. At a median follow-up of 24.5 months (range, 5.4-146.3), disease-free survival (hazard ratio, 1.09; 95% confidence interval, 0.70-1.90) and overall survival (hazard ratio, 0.86; 95% confidence interval, 0.56-1.33) were similar in both groups regardless of nodal count. Positive nodes were found in 23.7%. Predictor factors of nodal involvement were advanced age (P = 0.024), deep myometrial invasion (P < 0.001), and high CA 125 levels (P = 0.003). In the LDN group, operating time, late postoperative complications, and surgical cost were higher (P < 0.05). There were no statistical differences between both groups relative to surgical morbidity. Early postoperative complications and hospital stay were lower in the LDN group. The global cost was similar for both groups (6027&OV0556; for the LND group and 5772&OV0556; for the no-LND group). CONCLUSIONS: Lymphadenectomy in high-risk histotypes of EC does not increase perioperative morbidity or global cost and has not benefit on survival.