Eisenhauer Eric L, Wypych Kelly A, Mehrara Babak J, Lawson Carrie, Chi Dennis S, Barakat Richard R, Abu-Rustum Nadeem R
Gynecology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, 1275 York Avenue, MRI-1026, New York, NY 10021, USA.
Ann Surg Oncol. 2007 Aug;14(8):2384-91. doi: 10.1245/s10434-007-9440-6. Epub 2007 May 24.
Limiting surgical morbidity while maintaining staging adequacy is a primary concern in obese patients with uterine malignancy. The goal of this study was to compare the surgical adequacy and postoperative morbidity of three surgical approaches to staging the disease of obese women with uterine cancer.
The records of all patients with a body mass index (BMI) of >or=35 undergoing primary surgery for uterine corpus cancer at our institution from January 1993 to May 2006 were reviewed. Patients were assigned to three groups on the basis of planned surgical approach-standard laparotomy, laparoscopy, or laparotomy with panniculectomy. Standard statistical tests appropriate to group size were used to compare the three groups.
In all, 206 patients with a BMI of >or=35 were grouped as follows: laparotomy, 154 patients; laparoscopy, 25 patients; and laparotomy with panniculectomy, 27 patients. Median BMI was 41 (range, 35-84). Regional lymph nodes were removed in 45% of the laparotomy patients, 40% of the laparoscopy patients, and 70% of the panniculectomy patients (P = .04). Compared with laparotomy, both laparoscopy and panniculectomy yielded higher median pelvic and total lymph node counts (P = .001). Operative time was shortest after standard laparotomy, and blood loss was greatest after panniculectomy. The incidence of all incisional complications was lower for panniculectomy (11%) and laparoscopy (8%) compared with standard laparotomy (35%) (P = .002). On multivariate analysis, a significantly lower risk of total incisional complications was seen for patients undergoing panniculectomy (risk ratio, .25; 95% confidence interval, .071-.88) and laparoscopy (risk ratio, .19; 95% confidence interval, .04-.94).
Both laparoscopic staging and panniculectomy in a standardized fashion were associated with an improved lymph node count and a lower rate of incisional complications than laparotomy alone. Although definitive conclusions are limited by low patient numbers, the substantial decrease in wound complications suggests that these two approaches should be considered for obese patients undergoing uterine cancer staging.
在肥胖的子宫恶性肿瘤患者中,在保证分期准确的同时限制手术并发症是首要关注点。本研究的目的是比较三种手术方式对肥胖子宫癌女性疾病分期的手术充分性及术后并发症情况。
回顾了1993年1月至2006年5月在我院接受子宫体癌初次手术且体重指数(BMI)≥35的所有患者的记录。根据计划的手术方式将患者分为三组——标准剖腹术、腹腔镜手术或剖腹术联合腹壁成形术。采用适合组间规模的标准统计检验来比较这三组。
共有206例BMI≥35的患者,分组如下:剖腹术组154例;腹腔镜手术组25例;剖腹术联合腹壁成形术组27例。BMI中位数为41(范围35 - 84)。剖腹术患者中45%切除了区域淋巴结,腹腔镜手术患者中40%切除了区域淋巴结,剖腹术联合腹壁成形术患者中70%切除了区域淋巴结(P = 0.04)。与剖腹术相比,腹腔镜手术和剖腹术联合腹壁成形术的盆腔及总淋巴结计数中位数更高(P = 0.001)。标准剖腹术后手术时间最短,腹壁成形术后失血量最大。与标准剖腹术(35%)相比,腹壁成形术(11%)和腹腔镜手术(8%)的所有切口并发症发生率更低(P = 0.002)。多因素分析显示,接受腹壁成形术(风险比,0.25;95%置信区间,0.071 - 0.88)和腹腔镜手术(风险比,0.19;95%置信区间,0.04 - 0.94)的患者发生总切口并发症的风险显著更低。
与单纯剖腹术相比,标准化的腹腔镜分期术和腹壁成形术均能提高淋巴结计数,且切口并发症发生率更低。尽管确切结论因患者数量较少而受限,但伤口并发症的大幅减少表明,对于接受子宫癌分期的肥胖患者应考虑这两种手术方式。