Scribner D R, Walker J L, Johnson G A, McMeekin S D, Gold M A, Mannel R S
Gynecologic Oncology Fellow, Department of Gynecologic Oncology, University of Oklahoma Health Science Center, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma 73190, USA.
Gynecol Oncol. 2001 Dec;83(3):563-8. doi: 10.1006/gyno.2001.6463.
To give insight into the utility of laparoscopic staging of endometrial cancer in the elderly population by reviewing the surgical management of clinically stage I endometrial cancer patients.
A retrospective analysis evaluating patients that were > or =65 years old and had planned laparoscopic staging, traditional staging via a laparotomy, or a transvaginal hysterectomy as management of their early endometrial cancer. The laparoscopic group had complete staging with bilateral pelvic and paraaortic lymph node dissections and was compared to the group who had staging performed via laparotomy. Patients were identified by our institution's database and data were collected by review of their medical records. Data were collected on demographics, pathology, and procedural information including completion rates, operating room (OR) time, estimated blood loss (EBL), transfusions, lymph node count, complications, and length of stay. Associations between variables were analyzed by Student's t tests and chi(2) testing using Excel v. 9.0.
From February 25, 1994, through December 21, 2000, 125 elderly patients were identified. Sixty-seven patients had planned laparoscopic staging (Group 1), 45 patients had staging via planned laparotomy (Group 2), and 13 patients had a transvaginal hysterectomy (Group 3). Group 1 and Group 2 were compared regarding surgical and postoperative data. Age was not different between these groups (75.9 vs 74.7 years, P = NS). Quetelet index was also similar (29.4 vs 29.9, P = NS) 32.8% of Group 1 had > or =1 previous laparotomy compared to 51.1% in Group 2 (P = NS). In Group 1, 53/67 (79.1%) had stage I or II disease compared to 29/45 (64.4%) in Group 2 (P = NS). Laparoscopy was completed in 52/67 (77.6%) attempted procedures. The reasons for conversion to laparotomy were obesity 7/67 (10.4%), bleeding 4/67 (6.0%), intraperitoneal cancer 3/67 (4.5%), and adhesions 1/67 (1.5%). OR time was significantly longer in successful Group 1 patients compared to Group 2 patients (236 vs 148 min, p = 0.0001). EBL was similar between these groups (298 vs 336 ml, P = NS). Ten of 52 (19.2%) of successful Group 1 patients received a blood transfusion compared to 1/45 (2.2%) of Group 2 patients (P < 0.0001). Pelvic, common iliac, and paraaortic lymph node counts were similar between successful Group 1 patients and those in Group 2 combined with those that received a laparotomy in Group 1 (17.8, 5.2, 6.6 vs 19.1, 5.1, 5.2, P = NS). Length of stay (LOS) was significantly shorter in Group 1 versus Group 2 (3.0 vs 5.8 days, P < 0.0001). There were less fevers (6.0 vs 15.6%, P = 0.01), less postoperative ileus's (0 vs 15.6%, P < 0.001), and less wound complications (6.0 vs 26.7%, P = 0.002) in Group 1 compared to Group 2. Group 3 average age was 77.5 years. Concurrent medical comorbidities were the main reason for the transvaginal approach. OR time averaged 104.5 min. The average length of stay was 2.1 days with no procedural or postoperative complications.
The favorable results from this retrospective study refute the bias that age is a relative contraindication to laparoscopic surgery. Laparoscopic staging was associated with an increased OR time and an increased rate of transfusion but equivalent blood loss and lymph node counts. Possible advantages are decreased length of stay, less postoperative ileus, and less infections complications. Transvaginal hysterectomy still remains a proven option for women with serious comorbid medical problems with short OR times, minimal complications, and short lengths of stay.
通过回顾临床I期子宫内膜癌患者的手术治疗情况,深入了解腹腔镜分期在老年人群中对子宫内膜癌的应用价值。
进行一项回顾性分析,评估年龄≥65岁且计划接受腹腔镜分期、传统开腹分期或经阴道子宫切除术以治疗早期子宫内膜癌的患者。腹腔镜组进行了包括双侧盆腔及腹主动脉旁淋巴结清扫的完整分期,并与开腹分期组进行比较。通过本机构数据库识别患者,并通过查阅其病历收集数据。收集了人口统计学、病理学及手术相关信息,包括完成率、手术室(OR)时间、估计失血量(EBL)、输血情况、淋巴结计数、并发症及住院时间。使用Excel v. 9.0通过学生t检验和卡方检验分析变量之间的关联。
从1994年2月25日至2000年12月21日,共识别出125例老年患者。67例患者计划接受腹腔镜分期(第1组),45例患者接受计划开腹分期(第2组),13例患者接受经阴道子宫切除术(第3组)。比较第1组和第2组的手术及术后数据。两组患者年龄无差异(75.9岁对74.7岁,P =无统计学意义)。体重指数也相似(29.4对29.9,P =无统计学意义)。第1组32.8%的患者曾接受过≥1次开腹手术,而第2组为51.1%(P =无统计学意义)。第1组中,53/67(79.1%)为I期或II期疾病,第2组为29/45(64.4%)(P =无统计学意义)。67例尝试的腹腔镜手术中有52/67(77.6%)完成。转为开腹手术的原因包括肥胖7/67(10.4%)、出血4/67(6.0%)、腹腔内癌症3/67(4.5%)及粘连1/67(1.5%)。成功的第1组患者的OR时间显著长于第2组患者(236分钟对148分钟,p = 0.0001)。两组间EBL相似(298毫升对336毫升,P =无统计学意义)。成功的第1组患者中有十分之五(19.2%)接受了输血,而第2组患者中为1/45(2.2%)(P < 0.0001)。成功的第1组患者与第2组合并第1组中接受开腹手术的患者的盆腔、髂总及腹主动脉旁淋巴结计数相似(17.8、5.2、6.6对19.1、5.1、5.2,P =无统计学意义)。第1组的住院时间(LOS)显著短于第2组(3.0天对5.8天,P < 0.0001)。与第2组相比,第1组发热更少(6.0%对15.6%,P = 0.01),术后肠梗阻更少(0对15.6%,P < 0.001),伤口并发症更少(6.0%对26.7%,P = 0.002)。第3组平均年龄为77.5岁。并存的内科合并症是经阴道手术的主要原因。OR时间平均为104.5分钟。平均住院时间为2.天,无手术或术后并发症。
这项回顾性研究的良好结果反驳了年龄是腹腔镜手术相对禁忌证的偏见。腹腔镜分期与OR时间延长及输血率增加相关,但失血量和淋巴结计数相当。可能的优势包括住院时间缩短、术后肠梗阻减少及感染并发症减少。经阴道子宫切除术对于有严重内科合并症、手术时间短、并发症少及住院时间短的女性仍是一种行之有效的选择。