Laparoscopic approach for endometrial cancer offers similar results in terms of survival and oncological radicality as the laparotomic approach and a lower rate of complications, a quicker convalescence time and a shorter hospital stay
If you have been diagnosed with endometrial cancer the last thing on your mind may be conventional (FDA approved) and evidence-based non-conventional therapies. The devil is in the details as they say. The challenge you face is that your choices will lead to both quantity of life and quality of life in the weeks, months and years ahead.
Have you been diagnosed with endometrial cancer? Please scroll down the page, post a question or comment and I will reply to you ASAP.
- Cancer Survivor
- Cancer Coach
- Director PeopleBeatingCancer
“Laparoscopic surgery, also called minimally invasive surgery (MIS), bandaid surgery, or key hole surgery, is a modern surgical technique in which operations in the abdomen are performed through small incisions (usually 0.5–1.5 cm) as opposed to the larger incisions needed in laparotomy…
Laparoscopic surgery includes operations within the abdominal or pelvic cavities, whereas keyhole surgery performed on the thoracic or chest cavity is called thoracoscopic surgery. Laparoscopic and thoracoscopic surgery belong to the broader field of endoscopy.
There are a number of advantages to the patient with laparoscopic surgery versus an open procedure. These include reduced pain due to smaller incisions and hemorrhaging, and shorter recovery time.”
“A laparotomy is a surgical procedure involving a large incision through the abdominal wall to gain access into the abdominal cavity. It is also known as a celiotomy…”
“Objective: The aim of this study was to compare laparoscopic (LPS) and laparotomy (LPT) approaches for endometrial cancer, and to assess intraoperative and postoperative results, disease-free survival and overall survival.
Methods: We designed a prospective observational study, every patient diagnosed of endometrial cancer and subsidiary to surgical staging was included. Total hysterectomy, bilateral adnexectomy, pelvic lymphadenectomy were performed in every case. Paraaortic lymphadenectomy was performed depending on tumor histology.
Results: 70 patients with endometrial cancer were enrolled, 49 (70%) were treated laparoscopically and 21 (30%) laparotomically. There was not statistical significant difference in the mean operative time, it was 183.06 ± 21.03 min (range 120 – 230) in the LPS group and 195.24 ± 28.39 min (range 130 – 240) in the LPT group, mean difference 12.16 (95% CI ﹣0.2 – 24).
There was no difference in the number of lymph nodes resected. Mean blood loss was lower in the LPS group. There were less postoperative complications, 3 (6.12%) in the LPS group and 7 (33.3%) in the LPT group (p < 0.01). Mean hospital stay was significantly shorter in the LPS group 4.29 ± 1.62 days vs 8.81 ± 3.37 days in the LPT group (p < 0.01), mean difference 4.52 (95% CI 3.3 – 5.7). Overall survival was similar in both groups.
Conclusion: Laparoscopic approach for endometrial cancer offers similar results in terms of survival and oncological radicality as the laparotomic approach and a lower rate of complications, a quicker convalescence time and a shorter hospital stay.