Robot-assisted versus laparoscopic minimally invasive surgery for the treatment of stage I endometrial cancer

Abstract

ObjectiveRecent reports in both cervical and endometrial cancer suggest that minimally invasive surgery (MIS) had an unanticipated negative impact on long-term clinical outcomes, including recurrence and death. Given increasing use of robotic surgery since the LAP2 trial, we sought to compare the intermediate and long-term outcomes between those who underwent robotic surgery or laparoscopy for Stage I endometrial cancer. MethodsWe performed a retrospective review of patients from a single, large, academic, urban practice who underwent either laparoscopic or robot-assisted MIS (RA-MIS) for the treatment of endometrial carcinoma between 2006 and 2016, ensuring at least 5 years of potential follow-up. To adjust for differences in confounding variables between groups, propensity score-based inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) was performed. Overall and recurrence-free survival were compared using Cox proportional hazards regression models adjusting for confounding weights. Results1027 patients were included; 461 received laparoscopy and 566 received RA-MIS. RA-MIS use increased steadily during the study window, which resulted in longer mean surveillance in laparoscopy group (median 8.7 years versus 6.3 years, p < 0.001). RA-MIS was associated poorer recurrence-free (HR: 1.41, 95% CI: 1.12, 1.77) and overall survival (HR: 1.39, 95% CI: 1.06, 1.83). Disease-specific survival was also poorer in the RA-MIS group (HR: 3.51, 95% CI: 2.19, 5.63). Among those who recurred, median time to first recurrence was shorter in the RA-MIS group than the laparoscopy group (16.3 vs. 28.7 months, p = 0.07). ConclusionRA-MIS was associated with poorer long-term patient outcomes. Our data in this lower-risk population indicate relevant clinical endpoints may be occurring during intermediate and long-term follow-up windows. These findings support a prospective evaluation of the long-term outcomes of RA-MIS.