Journal of minimally invasive gynecology · 2015
Impact of Obesity on Surgical Treatment for Endometrial Cancer: A Multicenter Study Comparing Laparoscopy vs Open Surgery, with Propensity-Matched Analysis.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяМногоцентровое исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Uccella Stefano, Bonzini Matteo, Palomba Stefano, Fanfani Francesco, Ceccaroni Marcello, Seracchioli Renato, Vizza Enrico, Ferrero Annamaria, Roviglione Giovanni, Casadio Paolo, Corrado Giacomo, Scambia Giovanni, Ghezzi Fabio
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the impact of obesity on the outcomes of surgical treatment for endometrial cancer in general and also comparing laparoscopic and open abdominal approach.
DESIGN: Retrospective case-control study (Canadian Task Force classification II-1).
SETTING: Obstetrics and Gynecology Department, University of Insubria, Varese, Catholic University of the Sacred Heart, Rome, International School of Surgical Anatomy, Sacred Heart Hospital, Negrar, and Sant'Orsola-Malpighi Hospital, Bologna, Italy.
PATIENTS: Data of consecutive patients who underwent surgery for endometrial cancer in 4 centers were reviewed. Univariate and multivariable analyses were performed. Adjustment for potential selection bias in surgical approach was made using propensity score (PS) matching.
INTERVENTIONS: Laparoscopic or open surgical treatment for endometrial cancer.
MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: A total of 1266 patients were included, including 764 in the laparoscopy group and 502 in the open surgery group. A total of 391 patients (30.9%) were obese, including 238 (18.8%) with class I obesity, 89 (7%) with class II obesity, and 64 (5.1%) with class III obesity. The total number of complications, risk of wound complications, and venous thromboembolic events were higher in obese women compared with nonobese women. Blood transfusions, incidence/severity of postoperative complications, and postoperative hospital stay were significantly higher in the open surgery group compared with the laparoscopy group, irrespective of obesity. These differences remained significant in both multivariable analysis and PS-matched analysis. The percentage of patients who received lymphadenectomy declined significantly in patients with BMI ≥40 in both the laparoscopy and open surgery groups. Conversions from the initially intended minimally invasive approach to open surgery were 1.1% to 2.2% for women with BMI <40, but increased in those with BMI ≥40 (8.6%; p = .05). PS analysis showed a lower complication rate, shorter hospital stay, and greater likelihood of receiving lymphadenectomy in obese women in the laparoscopic group.
CONCLUSION: Laparoscopy for endometrial cancer retains its advantages over open surgery, even in obese patients. However, operating on obese patients can be challenging regardless of the surgical approach taken, especially in cases of morbid adiposity.
DESIGN: Retrospective case-control study (Canadian Task Force classification II-1).
SETTING: Obstetrics and Gynecology Department, University of Insubria, Varese, Catholic University of the Sacred Heart, Rome, International School of Surgical Anatomy, Sacred Heart Hospital, Negrar, and Sant'Orsola-Malpighi Hospital, Bologna, Italy.
PATIENTS: Data of consecutive patients who underwent surgery for endometrial cancer in 4 centers were reviewed. Univariate and multivariable analyses were performed. Adjustment for potential selection bias in surgical approach was made using propensity score (PS) matching.
INTERVENTIONS: Laparoscopic or open surgical treatment for endometrial cancer.
MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: A total of 1266 patients were included, including 764 in the laparoscopy group and 502 in the open surgery group. A total of 391 patients (30.9%) were obese, including 238 (18.8%) with class I obesity, 89 (7%) with class II obesity, and 64 (5.1%) with class III obesity. The total number of complications, risk of wound complications, and venous thromboembolic events were higher in obese women compared with nonobese women. Blood transfusions, incidence/severity of postoperative complications, and postoperative hospital stay were significantly higher in the open surgery group compared with the laparoscopy group, irrespective of obesity. These differences remained significant in both multivariable analysis and PS-matched analysis. The percentage of patients who received lymphadenectomy declined significantly in patients with BMI ≥40 in both the laparoscopy and open surgery groups. Conversions from the initially intended minimally invasive approach to open surgery were 1.1% to 2.2% for women with BMI <40, but increased in those with BMI ≥40 (8.6%; p = .05). PS analysis showed a lower complication rate, shorter hospital stay, and greater likelihood of receiving lymphadenectomy in obese women in the laparoscopic group.
CONCLUSION: Laparoscopy for endometrial cancer retains its advantages over open surgery, even in obese patients. However, operating on obese patients can be challenging regardless of the surgical approach taken, especially in cases of morbid adiposity.