Analysis of survival after laparoscopic-assisted vaginal hysterectomy compared with the conventional abdominal approach for early-stage endometrial carcinoma: A review of the literature

Study objectiveTo assess potential differences in perioperative features and survival between laparoscopic-assisted vaginal hysterectomy and conventional transabdominal hysterectomy in stage I endometrial cancer.DesignRetrospective, nonrandomized clinical study (Canadian Task Force classification II-2).SettingAcute-care, teaching hospital.PatientsA total of 370 patients undergoing hysterectomy and bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy with surgical staging for primary treatment for clinical stage I endometrial cancer from January 1995 through June 2001.InterventionClinical outcomes and survival in patients treated with laparoscopic-assisted vaginal hysterectomy (n = 55) and hysterectomy using the conventional abdominal approach (n = 315) were compared.Measurements and main resultsBaseline characteristics and histopathologic variables were similar in both groups. A total of 91.4% of patients underwent pelvic lymphadenectomy and 49.7% paraaortic lymphadenectomy. The median follow-up was 38.1 months. Blood loss, blood transfusions required, and length of stay were significantly lower in the laparoscopic group, but surgical time was significantly longer. The mean number of pelvic and aortic nodes recovered was higher in the laparoscopic group (p <.001). Differences in overall and recurrence-free survival rates were not observed.ConclusionSurgical staging of early-stage endometrial cancer by laparoscopic-assisted vaginal hysterectomy is feasible, with lower perioperative morbidity and shorter hospital stay compared with transabdominal hysterectomy. Prognosis and survival were not affected by the laparoscopic vaginal approach to hysterectomy.