Oncologic safety of minimally invasive surgery in non-endometrioid endometrial cancer.

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: This study was aimed to compare the oncologic outcomes of patients with non-endometrioid endometrial cancer who underwent minimally invasive surgery with the outcomes of patients who underwent open surgery. METHOD: This is a retrospective, multi-institutional study of patients with non-endometrioid endometrial cancer who were surgically staged by either minimally invasive surgery or open surgery. Oncologic outcomes of the patients were compared according to surgical approach. RESULTS: 113 patients met the inclusion and exclusion criteria. 57 underwent minimally invasive surgery and 56 underwent open surgery. Patients who underwent minimally invasive surgery had smaller tumors (median size, 3.3 vs. 5.2%, p = 0.0001) and a lower lymphovascular space invasion rate (29.8% vs. 48.2%, p = 0.045). In the overall population, the numbers and rate of recurrence were significantly higher in the open surgery group (p = 0.016). In multivariate analysis, disease stage and tumor size were associated with DFS in contrast to surgical procedure. CONCLUSION: Minimally invasive surgery showed similar survival outcomes when compared to open surgery in non-endometrioid endometrial cancer patients, irrespective of disease stage. When minimally invasive surgery is managed by expert surgeons, non-endometrioid histological subtypes should not be considered a contraindication for minimally invasive surgery.