Feasibility and morbidity of total laparoscopic radical hysterectomy with or without pelvic limphadenectomy in obese women with stage I endometrial cancer
- 213 Downloads
The aim of this study was to describe the feasibility and morbidity rates associated with total laparoscopic radical hysterectomy (TLRH) with or without pelvic lymphadenectomy for stage I endometrial cancer in obese women.
Patients and methods
Obese patients with stage I endometrial cancer who underwent total laparoscopic radical surgery at the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology of San Gerardo Hospital were compared to nonobese patients. The same group of obese patients was compared with patients who underwent radical laparotomic surgery. Obesity was defined as a body mass index more than 30 kg/m2.
Between September 2003 and September 2007, 75 women underwent TLRH. Median age was 54 years and median body mass index was 28 kg/m2. Thirty-seven women were obese.
There were no differences between nonobese and obese women in operative, time length of parametria and pelvic nodes removed and operative or late complications. Blood loss was significantly higher in obese patients.
Comparing retrospectively laparoscopy and laparotomy in obese women treated in our center, laparotomy was associated with decreased operative time, but also with increased blood loss, transfusion rate, duration of hospitalization and frequency of post surgical complications.
Total laparoscopic radical hysterectomy (with pelvic lymphadenectomy) is a safe option in patients with endometrial cancer. Obesity is not a contraindication to perform a TRLH with no differences in surgical parameters between obese and nonobese population. TLRH show a significant decrease of complications compared to laparotomic radical surgery in obese women.
KeywordsLaparoscopy Endometrial cancer Obesity TLRH
Conflict of interest statement
All the authors (Antonio Pellegrino, Mauro Signorelli, Robert Fruscio, Annalisa Villa, Alessandro Buda, Pietro Beretta, Annalisa Garbi and Domenico Vitobello) disclose any possibile conflict of interest.
- 1.Ries LA, Eisner MP, Kosary CL et al (2001) SEER cancer statistics review, 1973–1998. Bethesda National Cancer InstituteGoogle Scholar
- 7.Zullo F, Palomba S, Russo T, Falbo A, Costantino M, Tolino A et al (2005) A prospective randomized comparison between laparoscopic and laparotomic approaches in women with early stage endometrial cancer: a focus on the quality of life. Am J Obstet Gynecol 193(4):1344–1352. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2005.02.131 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 9.Spirtos NM, Eisenkop SM, Schlaerth JB, Ballon SC (2002) Laparoscopic radical hysterectomy (type III) with aortic and pelvic lymphadenectomy in patients with stage I cervical cancer: surgical morbidity and intermediate follow-up. Am J Obstet Gynecol 187(2):340–348. doi: 10.1067/mob.2002.123035 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 12.Holub Z, Voracek J, Shomani A (1998) A comparison of laparoscopic surgery with open procedure in endometrial cancer. Eur J Gynec Oncol 9:294–296Google Scholar
- 22.Abu-Rustum NR, Gemignani ML, Moore K, Sonoda Y, Venkatraman E, Brown C et al (2003) Total laparoscopic radical hysterectomy with pelvic lymphadenectomy using the argon-beam coagulator: pilot data and comparison to laparotomy. Gynecol Oncol 91(2):402–409. doi: 10.1016/S0090-8258(03)00518-3 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 24.Pelosi MA (1994) Laparoscopically-assisted hysterectomy in women weighing 200 lb or more. Gynaecol Endosc 3:159–162Google Scholar
- 29.Ghezzi F, Cromi A, Bergamini V, Uccella S, Beretta P, Franchi M et al (2006) Laparoscopic-assisted vaginal hysterectomy versus total laparoscopic hysterectomy for the management of endometrial cancer: a randomized clinical trial. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 13(2):114–120. doi: 10.1016/j.jmig.2005.11.013 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar