The need to tailor the omission of axillary lymph node dissection to patients with good prognosis and sentinel node micro-metastases.

BACKGROUND: Results of IBCSG-23-01-trial which included breast cancer patients with involved sentinel nodes (SN) by isolated-tumor-cells or micro-metastases supported the non-inferiority of completion axillary-lymph-node-dissection (cALND) omission. However, current data are considered insufficient to avoid cALND for all patients with SN-micro-metastases. METHODS: To investigate the impact of cALND omission on disease-free-survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS), we analyzed a cohort of 1421 patients <75 years old with SN-micro-metastases who underwent breast conservative surgery (BCS). We used inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) to obtain adjusted Kaplan-Meier estimators representing the experience in the analysis cohort, based on whether all or none had been subject to cALND omission. RESULTS: Weighted log-rank tests comparing adjusted Kaplan-Meier survival curves showed significant differences in OS (p-value = 0.002) and borderline significant differences in DFS (p-value = 0.090) between cALND omission versus cALND. Cox's regression using stabilized IPTW evidenced an average increase in the risk of death associated with cALND omission (HR = 2.77, CI95% = 1.36-5.66). Subgroup analyses suggest that the rates of recurrence and death associated with cALND omission increase substantially after a large period of time in the half sample of women less likely to miss cALND. CONCLUSIONS: Using IPTW to estimate the causal treatment effect of cALND in a large retrospective cohort, we concluded cALND omission is associated with an increased risk of recurrence and death in women of <75 years old treated by BCS in the absence of a large consensus in favor of omitting cALND. These results are particularly contributive for patients treated by BCS where cALND omission rates increase over time.

Mastectomy and Immediate Breast Reconstruction with Pre-Pectoral or Sub-Pectoral Implant: Assessing Clinical Practice, Post-Surgical Outcomes, Patient's Satisfaction and Cost.

Immediate breast reconstruction (IBR) rates increase during last years and implant-based reconstruction was the most commonly performed procedure. We examined data collected over 25 months to assess complication rate, duration of surgery, patient's satisfaction and cost, according to pre-pectoral or sub-pectoral implant-IBR. All patients who received an implant-IBR, from January 2020 to January 2022, were included. Results were compared between pre-pectoral and sub-pectoral implant-IBR in univariate and multivariate analysis. We performed 316 implant-IBR, 218 sub-pectoral and 98 (31%) pre-pectoral. Pre-pectoral implant-IBR was significantly associated with the year (2021: OR=12.08 and 2022: OR=76.6), the surgeons and type of mastectomy (SSM vs NSM: OR=0.377). Complications and complications Grade 2-3 rates were 12.9% and 10.1% for sub-pectoral implant-IBR respectively, without significant difference with pre-pectoral implant-IBR: 17.3% and 13.2%. Complications Grade 2-3 were significantly associated with age <50-years (OR=2.27), ASA-2 status (OR=3.63) and cup-size >C (OR=3.08), without difference between pre and sub-pectoral implant-IBR. Durations of surgery were significantly associated with cup-size C and >C (OR=1.72 and 2.80), with sentinel lymph-node biopsy and axillary dissection (OR=3.66 and 9.59) and with sub-pectoral implant-IBR (OR=2.088). Median hospitalization stay was 1 day, without difference between pre and sub-pectoral implant-IBR. Cost of surgery was significantly associated with cup-size > C (OR=2.216) and pre-pectoral implant-IBR (OR=8.02). Bad-medium satisfaction and IBR-failure were significantly associated with local recurrence (OR=8.820), post-mastectomy radiotherapy (OR=1.904) and sub-pectoral implant-IBR (OR=2.098). Conclusion: Complications were not different between pre and sub-pectoral implant-IBR. Pre-pectoral implant-IBR seems a reliable and faster technique with better patient satisfaction but with higher cost.

Contribution of endocrine therapy in oestrogen receptor-positive pT1a-b breast cancer: Results of a retrospective study.

INTRODUCTION: Few data have been reported regarding endocrine therapy (ET) in patients with small pT1a-b ER-postive breast cancer (BC). Thus, we conducted a study to detect possible survival improvements due to ET in such patients. METHODS: Our retrospective observational study included 5545 patients with pT1a-b ER-positive BC treated in 15 French centres, excluding patients with HER2-positive status, neoadjuvant chemotherapy, ER-negative status, unknown pN status or in situ BC. We estimated disease-free survival (DFS), recurrence-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS) via univariate analysis and multivariate Cox regression. RESULTS: Most patients (80.3%: 4453) received ET and-when compared to those without ET-experienced increases of 2.5% and 3.3% in DFS and 1.9% and 4.3% in RFS after 5 and 7 years of follow-up, respectively, with little difference in OS. In Cox regression analysis, no ET was significantly associated with decreased DFS (hazard ratio, HR = 1.275, p = 0.047, 95% CI[1.003-1.620]) but not OS or RFS in all patients, while in 2363 patients with pT1a-b ER-positive grade 2-3 BC, no ET was significantly associated with decreased DFS (HR = 1.502, p = 0.049, 95% CI[1.001-2.252]), but not OS (HR = 1.361, p = 0.272). ET omission was not significantly associated with decreased survival in 3047 patients with pT1a-b ER-positive grade 1 BC. CONCLUSION: Our results indicate that while ET provided a beneficial impact on survival to patients with pT1a-bN0 ER-positive BC-and especially in those with grade 2-3 tumours-no such impact was observed in grade 1 tumours. Consequently, ET should be discussed with these patients, particularly in those with pT1a grade 1 tumours.

Superior Hemimastectomy with Inferior Pedicle Nipple-Bearing Flap: A Five-Step Surgical Technique.

SUMMARY: Oncoplastic breast surgery is an evolving field combining both breast aesthetic surgery and oncologic breast surgery. It aims to optimize cosmetic outcomes without interfering with oncologic safety. The superior hemimastectomy is a technique that can be considered for large upper-quadrant breast tumors or multifocal and multicentric breast tumors localized in the upper quadrants. As with mastectomy, axillary procedures can be performed through the same incision. The nipple-areola complex can be preserved and reimplanted. Superior hemimastectomy allows wide excision of the breast tissue, but its main disadvantage is the increased risk of necrosis of the free grafted nipple-areola complex. In this article, the authors present the surgical technique of superior hemimastectomy with an inferior pedicle nipple-bearing flap. This technique is presented as a simple five-step algorithm. A modified superior hemimastectomy with nipple-areola complex preservation using an inferior pedicle nipple-bearing flap is an alternative to the classic superior hemimastectomy technique. This modified technique decreases the risk of nipple-areola complex necrosis and preserves better nipple-areola complex sensitivity.

Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy for Breast Cancer: Evolution of Clinical Practice in a French Cancer Center Over 16 Years and Pathologic Response Rates According to Tumor Subtypes and Clinical Tumor Size: Retrospective Cohort Study.

We examined characteristics trends in early breast cancer patients receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) over a 16-year period. Our primary objective was to analyze variations in tumor stage and subtype over time. Secondary objectives included analyses of type of surgery and pathological response, from January 2005 to May 2021, 1623 patients receiving NAC were identified. Three periods were determined: 2005-2009 (P1), 2010-2014 (P2), 2015-2021 (P3). Correlations between periods and patient features with cT stage, pathological breast and axillary node response, pathological complete response (pCR), and type of surgery were assessed in univariate and multivariate analyses. We observed a significant increase in cT0-1 and N0 stages with periods (from 6.8% at P1 to 21.2% at P3, and from 43.2% at P1 to 55.9% at P3, respectively) and in the proportion of HER2+ and triple negative (TN) subtypes. In a multivariate analysis, a decrease of cT2-3-4 tumors during P3 was observed for HER2+ (OR:0.174; p=0.004) and TN tumors (OR:0.287; p=0.042). In-breast pCR and pCR were observed in 40.8% and 34.4% of all patients, respectively, with strong association with tumor subtypes, but not with tumor size in multivariate analysis (37.0% pCR for cT0-1 tumors, 36.4% for cT2 tumors, 29.1% for cT3 tumors (cT0-1 versus cT≥2; p=0.222)). pCR was negatively associated with cN1 stage (OR:1.499; p<0.001 for cN1 patients compared to cN0). We observed an increase in the proportion of small cT0-1 and N0 stages treated with NAC, especially in HER2+ and TN subtypes. No significant impact of tumor size on pCR rates was found.

Robotic Versus Conventional Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy With Immediate Breast Reconstruction.

BACKGROUND: Several studies reported the feasibility and safety of robotic-NSM (R-NSM). The aim of our prospective study was to compare R-NSM and conventional-NSM (C-NSM). METHODS: We analyzed patients who were operated on with and without robotic assistance (R-NSM or C-NSM) and who received immediate breast reconstruction (IBR) with implant or latissimus dorsi-flap (LDF). The main objective was complication rate and secondary aims were post-operative length of hospitalization (POLH), duration of surgery, and cost. RESULTS: We analyzed 87 R-NSM and 142 C-NSM with implant-IBR in 50 and 135 patients, with LDF-IBR in 37 and 7 patients, respectively. Higher durations of surgery and costs were observed for R-NSM, without a difference in POLH and interval time to adjuvant therapy between R-NSM and C-NSM. In the multivariate analysis, R-NSM was not associated with a higher breast complication rate (OR=0.608) and significant factors were breast cup-size, LDF combined with implant-IBR, tobacco and inversed-T incision. Grade 2-3 breast complications rate were 13% for R-NSM and 17.3% for C-NSM, significantly higher for LDF combined with implant-IBR, areolar/radial incisions and BMI>=30. A predictive score was calculated (AUC=0.754). In logistic regression, patient's satisfaction between C-NSM and R-NSM were not significantly different, with unfavorable results for BMI >=25 (OR=2.139), NSM for recurrence (OR=5.371) and primary breast cancer with radiotherapy (OR=4.533). A predictive score was calculated. In conclusion, our study confirms the comparable clinical outcome between C- NSM and R-NSM, in the price of longer surgery and higher cost for R-NSM. Predictive scores of breast complications and satisfaction were significantly associated with factors known in the pre-operative period.

Mastectomy with immediate breast reconstruction: Results of a mono-centric 4-years cohort.

INTRODUCTION: Oncological safety, quality of life and cosmetic outcomes seems to be similar between breast conserving surgery (BCS) and mastectomy with immediate breast reconstruction (IBR). We report our experience of IBR for consecutive mastectomies realized in a recent period of four years in order to determined immediate surgical results according to type of mastectomy and type of reconstruction, as mains objectives. METHODS: All mastectomies with IBR during years 2016-2019 were included. A retrospective analysis with prospective data collection was performed. RESULTS: We analyzed 748 IBR: 353 nipple-sparing mastectomies (NSM), 391 skin-sparing mastectomies (SSM) and 4 standard mastectomies, 551 with definitive implant or expanders and 196 with latissimus dorsi-flap (LDF). More NSM were performed during the 2 last years and more LDF were performed for high BMI, high breast cup-size, neo-adjuvant chemotherapy and radiotherapy and local recurrence. We realized 111 robotic NSM and 125 robotic LDF. Longer duration of surgery was significantly associated with the robotic procedures.The overall complications crude rate was 31.4% with 9.9% of re-operations and 5.8% of implant loss. Grade 2-3 complications were significantly associated with smoking. Breast complications occurred in 32.9% of mastectomies with principally skin or nipple-areola-complex suffering or necrosis, hematomas and infections. A predictive score was determined to evaluate risk of complications before surgery. CONCLUSION: Mastectomy with IBR seems to be a safe technique with an acceptable complication rate which is increased by tobacco use, high breast cup-size and IBR-type.

Types of Mastectomies and Immediate Reconstructions for Ipsilateral Breast Local Recurrences.

Purpose: Ipsilateral-breast-local-recurrence (ILBLR) is a rare event with little data on immediate-breast-reconstruction (IBR). We report post-operative results of different types of mastectomy for ILBLR with or without IBR performed during a period of 40 months in order to analyze post-operative complications as main objective. Methods: We analyzed mastectomies performed for ILBLR after initial breast conservative treatment from January 2016 to April 2019. The characteristics of patients, surgery, complication rate, postoperative hospitalization have been determined. Results: Of the 207 mastectomies, 32.8% had an IBR: 31 nipple-sparing-mastectomy (NSM) and 37 skin-sparing-mastectomy (SSM) with 37 latissimus-dorsi-flap (LDF) IBR and 31 implant-IBR. Few reconstruction was performed for patients with body-mass-index ≥30 (OR = 0.214), infiltrating ductal carcinomas (OR = 0.272) and ASA-3 patients (OR = 0.254). In multivariate analysis, LDF-IBR was more often realized for NSM and for patients with BMI ≥25. The overall complication rate was 37.4%: 45.6 and 33.1% with and without IBR, respectively (p = 0.056). In multivariate analysis, BMI ≥25 (OR 2.02, p = 0.023), IBR (OR 1.9, p = 0.046) and tobacco (OR 2.17, p = 0.055) were correlated with higher risk of complications. There was no difference for Grade 2-3 complications rates for IBR and no IBR, respectively (14.7%: 10/68 and 9.3%: 13/139). In multivariate analysis, overall survival from date of mastectomy for local recurrence was significantly associated with interval time to local recurrence (OR 6.981). Conclusion: Salvage mastectomy and IBR is a good choice for ILBLR, particularly using flap reconstruction. NSM can be considered as a good option in selected patients for ILBLR for NSM and/or LDFR.

Robotic-assisted skin sparing mastectomy and immediate reconstruction using latissimus dorsi flap a new effective and safe technique: A comparative study.

INTRODUCTION: Breast reconstruction is an essential part of breast cancer treatment. After skin sparing mastectomy, Immediate Breast Reconstruction (IBR) can be achieved using breast implants, autologous flaps (i.e. latissimus dorsi-myo-cutaneous flap (LDF)) or an association of both. Robotic assistance has gained popularity in many surgical fields including breast surgery. This study aims to compare the post-operative results of Robotic Assisted Latissimus Dorsi Flap (RALDF) to Traditional Latissimus Dorsi Flap (TLDF) for IBR after Skin Sparing Mastectomy (SSM) without nipple conservation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between March 2016 and June 2019, all patients who underwent a SSM and a concurrent IBR with a TLDF were retrospectively compared to patients who underwent SSM and a concurrent IBR with a RALDF. Outcomes compared included operative time, length of hospital stay and complications rate. RESULTS: 105 cases of SSM with a LDF based IBR were included in the study. 46 patients underwent RALDF and 59 patients underwent TLDF. Mean operative time was longer in the RALDF group (290.5min versus 259.7min). In binary regression, the concomitant placement of breast implant was the only factor associated with an operative time exceeding 290 min (p = 0.032). Univariate analysis showed no significant difference concerning the rate of complications (p = 0.061). After logistic regression, RALDF was associated with a decreased rate of complications (p = 0.042; OR 0.37; IC 95% (0.142-0.966)). DISCUSSION: SSM with IBR using RALDF is an effective and safe technique. This technique is actually associated with a lower complication rate at the expense of a longer operative time.

Lessons from radiochemotherapy and modern image-guided adaptive brachytherapy followed by hysterectomy.

PURPOSE: To analyze the clinical outcomes and the safety of radiochemotherapy (RCT) and image-guided adaptive brachytherapy (IGABT) and to evaluate the impact of hysterectomy (HT) as completion of treatment for cervical cancer. METHODS AND MATERIALS: 145 patients with locally advanced cervical cancer were treated at our institution. Patients underwent RCT and IGABT, then hysterectomy (HT) as completion of treatment was performed, with the exception of patients with surgical contraindications, para aortic metastatic disease or patients who refused surgery. Clinical outcomes and morbidity were retrospectively reviewed in both groups. Local relapse free survival (LRFS), pelvic relapse free survival (PRFS) and overall survival (OS) were analyzed. RESULTS: Completion HT was performed in 90 (62.1%) patients. Complete histological response and microscopic disease were found in 77 patients (85.6%). Local relapse was observed in 14 patients (9.6%) without differences between completion HT group and the definitive RCT and IGABT group (Odds Ratio OR = 1.73 [0.57-5.23], p = 0.33). The estimated 3-year LRFS and PRFS for the entire population were respectively 90% [84%-94%] and 93% [87%-96%], with no significant differences between them (respectively Hazard Ratio HR = 0.57 [0.20-1.64], p = 0.30 and HR = 0.37 [0.10-1.31], p = 0.12). The estimated 3-year OS rate for the whole population was 84% [75%-91%] with no significant differences between groups (HR = 0.81 [0.32-2.06], p = 0.65). Regarding morbidity, grade ≥ 2 vaginal toxicity was more frequent in the definitive RCT and IGABT group (43.6% vs 26.7%, p = 0.04). All grade 4 toxicity events were reported in the completion HT group. CONCLUSIONS: Due to high severe toxicity, RCT and IGABT with dose escalation followed by completion hysterectomy don't seem compatible. No benefit and increased severe late morbidity were observed. Combined intracavitary/interstitial technique is mandatory in large target volume at brachytherapy.

Skin sparing mastectomy and robotic latissimus dorsi-flap reconstruction through a single incision.

BACKGROUND: Robotic latissimus dorsi-flap reconstruction (RLDFR) after skin-sparing mastectomy (SSM) for breast cancer (BC) has been performed through a single nipple incision. We report results of SSM with RLDFR, mainly with analysis of feasibility, morbidity, indications, and technique standardization. METHODS: We determined characteristics of patients, previous treatment of BC, and type of reconstruction. Surgical technique, duration of surgery, and complication rate were reported according to three successive periods: P1-3. RESULTS: Forty RLDFR, with breast implant for 16 patients, with previous breast radiotherapy in 30% had been performed. In logistic regression, factors significantly associated with duration of surgery ≥ 300 min were P2 (OR 0.024, p = 0.004) and P3 (OR 0.012, p = 0.004) versus P1. The median mastectomy weight was 330 g and 460 g for BMI < and ≥ 23.5 (p = 0.025). Length of hospitalization was 4 days. Total complication rate was 20% (8/40): seven breast complications (four re-operations) and one RLDF complication with re-operation. Periods were significantly predictive of complications (p = 0.045). CONCLUSION: SSM with RLDFR is feasible, safe, and reproducible. We reported a decrease of duration of surgery, length of post-operative hospitalization, and complication rate.

Robotic breast and reconstructive surgery: 100 procedures in 2-years for 80 patients.

OBJECTIVE: To analyze results of the first 100 robotic breast surgeries: feasibility, morbidity, indications and standardization of patient positioning and operative technique. BACKGROUND: Robotic breast surgery is an emergent procedure. METHODS: A prospective cohort of patients undergoing robotic latissimus dorsi-flap reconstruction (RLDFR) and or robotic mastectomy, over a period of 24 months was analyzed. We analyzed patient's characteristics, previous treatment for breast cancer, primitive breast cancer or local recurrence, immediate or delayed breast reconstruction and type of reconstruction. Surgical techniques and duration of surgery were reported according to three successive periods. RESULTS: 46.2% of patients (37/80) had previous breast radiotherapy and 26.2% (21/80) had received neo-adjuvant chemotherapy. Surgical procedure and patient position are described. Surgical incision used for RLDFR was: 37 axillar (50.7%), 20 (27.4%) areolar, 7 (9.6%) central breast, 10 (13.7%) previous incision. Number of surgical procedures was >2 for 35 patients. In logistic regression, factors significantly associated with duration of surgery ≥305mn were: P2 with decreased operative duration (OR: 0.077, p = 0.002) and P3 (OR: 0.015, p < 0.0001) versus P1; and number of surgical procedures: 4 surgical procedures (OR: 15.60, p = 0.048) versus 1. Median hospital stay was 4 days. Total complication rate was 57.5% (46 patients) with 6 grade 2, 9 grade 3 and 1 grade 4 complication. For RLDFR we reported 1 grade 3 (1.3%) and 29 grade 1 (39.7%) complications consisting in dorsal seromas. CONCLUSION: RLDFR is a safe and reproducible procedure that allows breast reconstruction through a single incision, without dorsal scar. A decrease in surgery duration was observed with technique standardization and throughout the learning curve.

Positive or close margins: reoperation rate and second conservative resection or total mastectomy?

INTRODUCTION: Reoperation after breast-conserving surgery (BCS) could be proposed for positive or close margins. Reoperation type, re-excision or mastectomy, depends on several factors in relation to patient's and tumor's characteristics. We have analyzed our breast cancer (BC) database in order to determine second and third attempts for BCS and mastectomy rates, as well as associated factors for type of surgery. METHODS: All patients with BCS between 1995 and 2017 were included. Patient's characteristics, pathologic results, and treatments were analyzed. Reoperation rate, type of reoperation, second reoperation, and associated factors of reoperation, mastectomy, and third intervention were determined. Three periods were determined: P1-P3. RESULTS: We analyzed 10,761 patients: 1,161 with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) and 9,600 with invasive BC. The reoperation rate was 41.4% for DCIS and 28.0% for invasive BC. Using multivariate analysis, we identified tumor size >20 mm as being a risk factor for reoperation, whereas age >50 years, P2-3, and some localization decreased reoperation rates. For invasive BC, age >40 years, triple-negative tumors, neoadjuvant chemotherapy, and noncentral tumors decreased reoperation rates and lobular tumor, multifocal tumors, lymphovascular invasion, DCIS component, and Her2-positive tumors increased reoperation rates. For patients requiring reoperation, re-excision was performed in 48.1% (1,523/3,168) and mastectomy was required after first re-excision in 13.46% (205/1,523). For DCIS, mastectomy rates were higher for grade 2 and tumor ≥20 mm. For invasive BC, mastectomy rates were higher for lobular, multifocal, ≥20 mm, Her2-positive tumors and diffuse positive margins and lower for age >50 years and during the last period. Even if interval time between surgery and adjuvant treatments was higher for patients with reoperation, survival rates were not different between patients with and without reoperation. CONCLUSION: A decrease in reoperation and mastectomy rates had been reported with several associated factors. A third intervention with mastectomy was required in 13.5% of patients. This information should be done in case of reoperation.

Contribution of intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT) for therapeutic de-escalation in early breast cancer: Report of a single institution's experience.

The spread of systematic screening and the emergence of oncoplastic techniques allow more breast conservative treatment associating lumpectomy and external beam radiation therapy. In order to furthermore facilitate the patient's treatment, intraoperative radiation therapy (IORT) has been developed. The oncological safety of this technique has been studied, and is considered acceptable. Many questions remain unsolved in regard of the toxicity of this procedure as well as the patient's selection criteria. In this study, we present the first results and complications rate of patients treated by IORT in a single French institution. Between 2012 and 2015, all patients with breast cancer treated in a one-step procedure associating lumpectomy and IORT were retrospectively included in a monocentric cohort. Acute and long-term toxicities were evaluated using CTCAE v4.0 classification. 280 breast cancers were treated using IORT procedure. Additional external beam radiation therapy was requested for 45.7% patients. The acute complications rate was 14.6%, with 5 surgical revisions needed (1.78%). With a median follow up of 911 days, the long-term grade-3 toxicity rate was 1.1%. The only risk factor for local fibrosis was external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) (OR = 1.99; IC95 [1.05-3.81], P = 0.036). Three patients (1.07%) were diagnosed with local recurrence. The results from this cohort confirm the low complication and recurrence rate of IORT procedure. A good selection of patients is necessary in order to lower the EBRT rate and allow therapeutic de-escalation. The classification of tumors into IHC subsets seems a good selection gate. Intraoperative radiation therapy appears to have a low toxicity rate with an acceptable local recurrence risk, and should therefore be considered as an option in the treatment of early breast cancer.

Feasibility and surgical outcomes of conventional and robot-assisted laparoscopy for early-stage ovarian cancer: a retrospective, multicenter analysis.

PURPOSE: We aimed to investigate the safety, adequacy and oncological outcomes of laparoscopic surgery (LS) and robot-assisted laparoscopic (RALS) approach for the treatment of early-stage ovarian cancer. METHODS: We performed a multicentric, retrospective cohort study, enrolling patients affected by early-stage ovarian cancer who underwent laparoscopic management for early-stage ovarian cancer between 2006 and 2014. Surgical, pathologic and oncologic outcome data were analyzed to compare LS and RALS performances for early-stage ovarian cancer management. RESULTS: 39 patients underwent laparoscopic staging for presumed stage I ovarian cancer: 23 underwent LS and 16 underwent RALS. The mean operative time was 281 ± 81 min (LS 288 ± 88 min; RALS 270 ± 72 min; p = 0.49). No conversion to laparotomy occurred, and one patient had intraoperative hemorrhage requiring blood transfusion. Four patients (10.2 %) experienced postoperative complications of grade 3 according to the Clavien-Dindo classification. The median hospital stay was 3 days (1-15); the differences were not statistically significant between two groups [LS = 4 (1-15); RALS = 3 (1-7); p = 0.43]. During a mean follow-up period of 19.4 months, tumor recurrence occurred in 3 patients: 2 (8.7 %) in the LS group and 1 (6.25 %) in the RALS group. Overall survival and disease-free survival for the entire cohort were 97.4 and 92.3 %, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: LS and RALS seem to be adequate and feasible for the treatment of early-stage ovarian cancer in terms of the surgical outcomes and oncological safety. Furthermore, in our experience, perioperative outcomes are comparable between LS and RALS making them an acceptable approach in selected patients.