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.
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.
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.
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.
Endometrial Carcinoma: Comparison of Surgical Approaches (Laparoscopy vs Laparotomy) : Multicenter Retrospective Observational Study
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Predictive clinicopathologic factors for para-aortic nodal involvement in endometrial carcinoma.BMC cancer · 2026Article
- Minimally Invasive Surgery in Endometrial Cancer: Superior for Low-Risk and Comparable for High-Risk Cases in a 20-Year Cohort Study.Geburtshilfe und Frauenheilkunde · 2025Article
- Treatment of endometrial cancer from 2000 to 2020 in Germany: a retrospective population based cohort study.Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology · 2024Article
- Laparoscopic vs. open procedure for intermediate‑ and high‑risk endometrial cancer: a minimum 4-year follow-up analysis.BMC cancer · 2022Article
- Radical Hysterectomy for Cervical Cancer: the Right Surgical Approach.Current treatment options in oncology · 2022Review
- [Non endometroid endometrial cancer guidelines evaluation: A multicentric retrospective study].Bulletin du cancer · 2020Observational
- A Review of Laparoscopic Para-aortic Lymphadenectomy for Early-stage Endometrial Cancer: Extraperitoneal Approach May Have the Advantage over Intraperitoneal Approach.Gynecology and minimally invasive therapyReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
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
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.