ArticleRevista da Associacao Medica Brasileira (1992)2025
Laparoscopy without uterine manipulator vs. laparotomy in endometrial cancer: a retrospective study.
Article in Revista da Associacao Medica Brasileira (1992), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe objective of the study was to evaluate perioperative and oncologic outcomes of laparoscopy without the use of uterine manipulators and laparotomy in high-grade and serous endometrial cancer.
methodsPatients with grade III endometrioid adenocarcinoma and serous carcinoma between 2018 and 2022 were included in the study. Preoperative staging with positron emission tomography/computed tomography or thoracoabdominal computed tomography and pelvic magnetic resonance imaging was performed. All patients underwent staging surgery including hysterectomy, bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy, peritoneal washing, omentectomy, and pelvic and paraaortic lymphadenectomy up to the renal vein. No uterine manipulator was used for laparoscopic hysterectomy. Age, CA 125 level, body mass index, accompanying diseases, pathologic data including stage, lymphovascular invasion, number of pelvic and paraaortic lymph nodes, and surgical data including surgical time, surgical complications, and adjuvant therapies were collected from the hospital database retrospectively.
resultsNotably, 89 patients were included in the study: 34 underwent laparotomy and 55 underwent laparoscopy. Surgical times were similar between the groups. The mean pelvic lymph node count in the laparotomy and laparoscopy groups was 33 and 34, respectively. The mean paraaortic lymph node counts in the laparotomy and laparoscopy groups were 23 and 22, respectively. Red blood cell transfusion, hemorrhage, urinary tract infection, postoperative fever, bladder atony, bladder injury, and chylous leakage showed no significant differences between the groups. However, ileus, intestinal injury, and evisceration were significantly higher in the laparotomy group. Hospital stay was significantly longer in the laparotomy group compared with the laparoscopy group. Overall and recurrence-free survival were similar between the groups.
conclusionLaparoscopic surgery, performed without manipulators, provides comparable oncologic outcomes to open surgery in the treatment of high-grade endometrial cancer, while also offering improved perioperative results.
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.