Lomboaortic Lymphadenectomy in Gynecological Oncology: Laparotomy, Laparoscopy or Robot-Assisted Laparoscopy?

BACKGROUND

The outcomes of paraaortic lymphadenectomy were compared for the treatment of gynecological malignancies to identify the most appropriate surgical approach.

METHODS

Our retrospective, multicentric study included 1304 patients who underwent paraaortic lymphadenectomy for gynecological malignancies. The patients were categorized into the following five groups based on treatment type: transperitoneal laparoscopy (group A, n = 198), extraperitoneal laparoscopy (group B, n = 681), robot-assisted transperitoneal laparoscopy (group C, n = 135), robot-assisted extraperitoneal laparoscopy (group D, n = 44), and laparotomy (group E, n = 246).

RESULTS

The prevalence of cancer types differed according to the surgical approach: there were more ovarian cancers in group E and more cervical cancers in groups B and D (p < 0.001). Estimated blood loss was higher in group E (844.2 mL) than in groups treated with minimally invasive interventions (115.8-141.5 mL, p < 0.005). For infrarenal dissection, fewer nodes were removed in group C compared with the other approaches (16 vs. 21 nodes, respectively, p < 0.05). The average operative time ranged from 169 min for group A to 247 min for group E (p < 0.001). Length of hospital stay was 14 days for group E versus 3.5 days for minimally invasive procedures (p < 0.05). The early postoperative grade 3 and superior Dindo-Clavien complications occurred in 9-10% of the patients in groups B-D, 15% of the patients in group E, and only 3% and 4% for groups A and C, respectively. The most common complication was lymphocele.

CONCLUSIONS

Laparotomy increases preoperative and postoperative morbidity. The robot-assisted transperitoneal approach demonstrated a poorer lymph node yield than laparotomy and extraperitoneal approaches.