Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31901975›Full record

Observational studyJournal of cancer research and clinical oncology2020

Long-term outcome of patients with intermediate- and high-risk endometrial cancer after pelvic and paraaortic lymph node dissection: a comparison of laparoscopic vs. open procedure.

Thomas Papathemelis, Helen Oppermann, Stella Grafl, Michael Gerken, Armin Pauer, Sophia Scharl, Anton Scharl, Elisabeth Inwald, Atanas Ignatov, Olaf Ortmann and 4 more

Registry-linked trialAbstract readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06790004 (Endometrial Carcinoma), which is not on this map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT06790004 active not recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2021, after this paper: background citation

Endometrial Carcinoma: Comparison of Surgical Approaches (Laparoscopy vs Laparotomy) : Multicenter Retrospective Observational Study

TypeobservationalSponsorAzienda USL Reggio Emilia - IRCCSRan2021 to 2026Enrolled700ConditionsEndometrial CarcinomaArmsLaparotomy, Laparoscopy
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Observational
  7. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

14 authors.

Thomas PapathemelisFrauenklinik, Klinikum St. Marien Amberg, Amberg, Germany. papathemelis@web.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1805-2610
Helen OppermannTumor Center, University of Regensburg, Regensburg, Germany.
Stella GraflFrauenklinik, Universitätsklinikum Erlangen, CCC Erlangen-EMN, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen, Erlangen, Germany.
Michael GerkenTumor Center, University of Regensburg, Regensburg, Germany.
Armin PauerTumor Center, University of Regensburg, Regensburg, Germany.
Sophia ScharlDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Klinikum Rechts Der Isar, Technische Universität München (TUM), Ismaninger Straße 22, 81675, Munich, Germany.
Anton ScharlFrauenklinik, Klinikum St. Marien Amberg, Amberg, Germany.
Elisabeth InwaldDepartment of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Medical Center, Landshuter Str. 65, 93053, Regensburg, Germany.
Atanas IgnatovDepartment of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Medical Center, Landshuter Str. 65, 93053, Regensburg, Germany.
Olaf OrtmannDepartment of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Medical Center, Landshuter Str. 65, 93053, Regensburg, Germany.
Monika Klinkhammer-SchalkeTumor Center, University of Regensburg, Regensburg, Germany.
Alexander HeinFrauenklinik, Universitätsklinikum Erlangen, CCC Erlangen-EMN, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen, Erlangen, Germany.
Matthias W BeckmannFrauenklinik, Universitätsklinikum Erlangen, CCC Erlangen-EMN, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen, Erlangen, Germany.
Michael P LuxKlinik für Gynäkologie Und Geburtshilfe, Frauen- und Kinderklinik St. Louise, Paderborn, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThe primary therapy for intermediate- and high-risk endometrial cancer includes pelvic and paraaortic lymph node evaluation. Laparoscopic surgery is an increasingly popular intervention due to decreased risk and better short-term morbidity; however, a recent study casts doubt on the benefit of this approach in terms of oncological safety. In this cancer registry study, we sought to evaluate the benefit of laparoscopy versus laparotomy and retrospectively compared overall survival, recurrence rates, and recurrence-free survival among patients with intermediate- and high-risk endometrial cancer who underwent either laparoscopic or open surgery.

methodsThis observational study included 419 patients who have been treated from 2011 to 2017. We employed Kaplan-Meier method, and univariable and multivariable Cox-regression to compare overall survival, recurrence rates, and recurrence-free survival in 110 patients, who underwent laparoscopic, with 309 patients, who underwent open surgery. To address the confounding bias in this retrospective study, we also performed a propensity score matching (PSM) analysis including 357 patients (laparoscopy: n = 107; open surgery: n = 250).

resultsWe found a benefit for laparoscopic over open surgery in patients with intermediate- and high-risk endometrial cancer for overall survival in both univariable (p = 0.002; PSM: p = 0.016) and multivariable analyses (p = 0.019; PSM: p = 0.007). In contrast, there was no statistically significant difference between both patient groups regarding the cumulative recurrence rates. A univariable analysis identified a significant benefit for laparoscopy regarding recurrence-free survival (p = 0.003; PSM: p = 0.029) but a multivariable analysis failed to confirm this finding (p = 0.108; PSM: p = 0.118).

conclusionsOur study provides evidence that laparoscopic systematic lymphadenectomy does not present a lower oncological efficacy than open surgery in the treatment of patients with endometrial cancer.

Indexed as

AgedCohort StudiesDisease-Free SurvivalEndometrial NeoplasmsFemaleHumansKaplan-Meier EstimateLaparoscopyLymph Node ExcisionLymph NodesMiddle AgedNeoplasm StagingPropensity ScoreProportional Hazards ModelsRetrospective StudiesTreatment OutcomeCancer registry studyEndometrial cancerLaparoscopyLaparotomyObservational studyOverall survivalPelvic and paraaortic lymphadenectomy

Identifiers

PMID31901975
PMCPMC11804700

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.