ArticleGynecologic oncology reports2024
Vaginal lacerations during laparoscopic hysterectomy for endometrial cancer and local recurrence risk.
Article in Gynecologic oncology reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Manipulator-Free Versus Manipulator-Assisted Total Laparoscopic Hysterectomy: Are Outcomes Comparable in Experienced Hands?Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Laparoscopic surgery (MIS) offers equivalent oncologic outcomes as compared to open surgery, while causing lesser morbidity and resulting in a faster recovery. Vaginal extraction of specimens may cause vaginal or perineal lacerations (VL). The objective of this retrospective study was to assess local recurrence rates compared between cases with vaginal laceration (VL) or without vaginal lacerations (NL). Methods: We identified patients with endometrial cancer who underwent MIS between 2014 and 2018. We assessed the rate of local recurrence between patients in VL and NL cohorts. The study included all histologic subtypes and stages while benign final pathology, synchronous primaries or cases that required laparotomy for extraction were excluded. Results: 338 MIS cases were evaluable of which 40 cases had a vaginal laceration during specimen extraction. There was no significant difference in age, race, presence of LVSI, stage, grade, histology or use of vaginal brachytherapy between cohorts. Cases with vaginal lacerations were significantly associated with a higher median BMI and larger uterine size. The VL cohort was more likely to have received adjuvant treatment. In early stage disease, more cases had non-endometrioid histology in the VL group and had increased incidence of chemotherapy and radiation use as well. There were no cases of isolated vaginal recurrence (0/40) in the VL group as compared to an incidence of 2 % (7/298) in the NL group with a relative risk of 0.48 (CI: 0.03-8.36, p = 0.62). There were 4 cases of pelvic recurrence (4/40) in the VL group and 2 cases in the NL group (2/298) with a relative risk of 2.13 (CI: 0.46-9.89, p = 0.34). Conclusions: In endometrial cancer cases, we did not observe a significantly increased risk of vaginal or pelvic recurrence after a vaginal laceration at the time of specimen removal.
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.