Survival after laparoscopy versus laparotomy for apparent early-stage uterine clear cell carcinoma: Results of a large multicenter cohort study

Chengyu Shui,Lin Ran,Yong Tian,Li Qin,Xin Gu,Hui Xu,Cui Hu,Lin-Lin Zhang,You Xu,Chen Cheng,Wu Huan
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2022.975485
IF: 4.7
2022-09-05
Frontiers in Oncology
Abstract:Objective: To compare the long-term survival between laparoscopic surgery and open surgery in patients with apparent early-stage uterine clear cell carcinoma (UCCC). Patients and methods: 254 patients with apparent early-stage UCCC were reviewed. Comparisons were made between patients who underwent laparoscopic surgery versus those who underwent open surgery. Baseline data, clinicopathological data, and oncological outcomes were analyzed. 5-year disease-free survival (DFS) rate and 5-year overall survival (OS) rate were estimated and compared using the Kaplan-Meier method and the Log-rank test. The Cox proportional hazard regression model was employed to control the confounding factors. Results: 147 patients underwent laparoscopic surgery, and 107 patients were managed by open surgery. No differences in terms of recurrence rate (laparoscopy versus laparotomy: 10.9% versus 12.9%, P =0.842) and recurrence pattern were observed. For patients who underwent open surgery and patients who underwent laparoscopic surgery, the 5-year DFS rates and 5-year OS rate were 75.8% (95% CI: 65.8%-83.2%) and 69.1% (95% CI: 58.8%-77.4%), 66.0% (95% CI: 57.1%-73.5%) and 60.8% (95% CI: 52.0%-68.5%), respectively. The Cox proportional hazards regression model shown that for apparent early-stage UCCC, the approach of surgical staging was not an independent predictor for survival (laparoscopy versus laparotomy: for DFS, aHR=1.06, 95% CI=0.64-1.75, P =0.826; for OS, aHR=1.10, 95% CI=0.72-1.68, P =0.671). Conclusion: For apparent early-stage UCCC, in terms of oncological survival, laparoscopic surgery was as safe as open surgery.
oncology
What problem does this paper attempt to address?