阴道、腹腔镜和机器人辅助手术治疗“高龄”子宫内膜癌的短期和长期结果。

IF 3.5 2区 医学 Q2 ONCOLOGY
Ejso Pub Date : 2024-12-27 DOI:10.1016/j.ejso.2024.109568
Giorgio Bogani, Francesco Raspagliesi, Mario Malzoni, Ilaria Cuccu, Giuseppe Vizzielli, Giovanni Scambia, Fabio Ghezzi, Jvan Casarin
{"title":"阴道、腹腔镜和机器人辅助手术治疗“高龄”子宫内膜癌的短期和长期结果。","authors":"Giorgio Bogani, Francesco Raspagliesi, Mario Malzoni, Ilaria Cuccu, Giuseppe Vizzielli, Giovanni Scambia, Fabio Ghezzi, Jvan Casarin","doi":"10.1016/j.ejso.2024.109568","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To assess the safety and long-term effectiveness of minimally invasive approach in managing \"oldest old\" endometrial cancer patients.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This is a retrospective cohort, multi-institutional study. Consecutive patients, treated between 2000 and 2020, with apparent early-stage endometrial cancer patients, aged ≥85 years. Surgery-related outcomes of robotic-assisted, laparoscopic, and vaginal surgery were compared. Survival was evaluated in patients with at least 3-year follow-up data.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Charts of 82 endometrial cancer patients \"oldest old\" were retrieved. Intermediate-high and high-risk endometrial cancer patients accounted for 26 (31.7 %) and 17 (20.7 %), respectively. In total, 12 (15 %), 45 (55 %), and 25 (30 %) patients underwent robotic-assisted, laparoscopic, and vaginal surgery, respectively. Looking at surgery-related outcomes, robotic-assisted surgery correlated with a longer operative time (p < 0.001) and longer length of hospital stay (p = 0.002) in comparison to laparoscopic and vaginal approaches. Overall, seven (8.5 %) conversions from the planned approach occurred. The surgical approach did not influence disease-free survival (p = 0.6061) and overall survival (p = 0.4950). Via multivariate analysis, only serosal/adnexal invasion correlated with the risk of death (HR: 3.752, p = 0.038).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>All three minimally invasive approaches are safe and effective methods for managing endometrial cancer in the oldest old population. Chronological age, per se, should not be considered a contraindication for receiving minimally invasive surgery.</p>","PeriodicalId":11522,"journal":{"name":"Ejso","volume":"51 3","pages":"109568"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Short- and long-term outcomes of vaginal, laparoscopic, and robotic-assisted surgery in \\\"oldest old\\\" endometrial cancer.\",\"authors\":\"Giorgio Bogani, Francesco Raspagliesi, Mario Malzoni, Ilaria Cuccu, Giuseppe Vizzielli, Giovanni Scambia, Fabio Ghezzi, Jvan Casarin\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.ejso.2024.109568\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To assess the safety and long-term effectiveness of minimally invasive approach in managing \\\"oldest old\\\" endometrial cancer patients.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This is a retrospective cohort, multi-institutional study. Consecutive patients, treated between 2000 and 2020, with apparent early-stage endometrial cancer patients, aged ≥85 years. Surgery-related outcomes of robotic-assisted, laparoscopic, and vaginal surgery were compared. Survival was evaluated in patients with at least 3-year follow-up data.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Charts of 82 endometrial cancer patients \\\"oldest old\\\" were retrieved. Intermediate-high and high-risk endometrial cancer patients accounted for 26 (31.7 %) and 17 (20.7 %), respectively. In total, 12 (15 %), 45 (55 %), and 25 (30 %) patients underwent robotic-assisted, laparoscopic, and vaginal surgery, respectively. Looking at surgery-related outcomes, robotic-assisted surgery correlated with a longer operative time (p < 0.001) and longer length of hospital stay (p = 0.002) in comparison to laparoscopic and vaginal approaches. Overall, seven (8.5 %) conversions from the planned approach occurred. The surgical approach did not influence disease-free survival (p = 0.6061) and overall survival (p = 0.4950). Via multivariate analysis, only serosal/adnexal invasion correlated with the risk of death (HR: 3.752, p = 0.038).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>All three minimally invasive approaches are safe and effective methods for managing endometrial cancer in the oldest old population. Chronological age, per se, should not be considered a contraindication for receiving minimally invasive surgery.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":11522,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Ejso\",\"volume\":\"51 3\",\"pages\":\"109568\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Ejso\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejso.2024.109568\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ONCOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ejso","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejso.2024.109568","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:评价微创入路治疗“高龄高龄”子宫内膜癌患者的安全性和远期疗效。方法:这是一项回顾性队列、多机构研究。连续患者,2000 - 2020年间治疗,明显早期子宫内膜癌患者,年龄≥85岁。比较机器人辅助手术、腹腔镜手术和阴道手术的手术相关结果。在至少3年的随访数据中评估患者的生存。结果:检索到82例高龄子宫内膜癌患者的图表。中、高危子宫内膜癌患者分别为26例(31.7%)和17例(20.7%)。总共有12例(15%)、45例(55%)和25例(30%)患者分别接受了机器人辅助手术、腹腔镜手术和阴道手术。从手术相关的结果来看,机器人辅助手术与更长的手术时间相关(p)。结论:所有三种微创方法都是治疗高龄人群子宫内膜癌的安全有效的方法。实足年龄本身不应被视为接受微创手术的禁忌症。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Short- and long-term outcomes of vaginal, laparoscopic, and robotic-assisted surgery in "oldest old" endometrial cancer.

Objective: To assess the safety and long-term effectiveness of minimally invasive approach in managing "oldest old" endometrial cancer patients.

Methods: This is a retrospective cohort, multi-institutional study. Consecutive patients, treated between 2000 and 2020, with apparent early-stage endometrial cancer patients, aged ≥85 years. Surgery-related outcomes of robotic-assisted, laparoscopic, and vaginal surgery were compared. Survival was evaluated in patients with at least 3-year follow-up data.

Results: Charts of 82 endometrial cancer patients "oldest old" were retrieved. Intermediate-high and high-risk endometrial cancer patients accounted for 26 (31.7 %) and 17 (20.7 %), respectively. In total, 12 (15 %), 45 (55 %), and 25 (30 %) patients underwent robotic-assisted, laparoscopic, and vaginal surgery, respectively. Looking at surgery-related outcomes, robotic-assisted surgery correlated with a longer operative time (p < 0.001) and longer length of hospital stay (p = 0.002) in comparison to laparoscopic and vaginal approaches. Overall, seven (8.5 %) conversions from the planned approach occurred. The surgical approach did not influence disease-free survival (p = 0.6061) and overall survival (p = 0.4950). Via multivariate analysis, only serosal/adnexal invasion correlated with the risk of death (HR: 3.752, p = 0.038).

Conclusions: All three minimally invasive approaches are safe and effective methods for managing endometrial cancer in the oldest old population. Chronological age, per se, should not be considered a contraindication for receiving minimally invasive surgery.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Ejso
Ejso 医学-外科
CiteScore
6.40
自引率
2.60%
发文量
1148
审稿时长
41 days
期刊介绍: JSO - European Journal of Surgical Oncology ("the Journal of Cancer Surgery") is the Official Journal of the European Society of Surgical Oncology and BASO ~ the Association for Cancer Surgery. The EJSO aims to advance surgical oncology research and practice through the publication of original research articles, review articles, editorials, debates and correspondence.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信