This study by Janda et al. (JAMA Network, 2017) sought to determine if outcomes following total laparoscopic hysterectomy (TLH) were the same for disease-free survival as total abdominal hysterectomy (TAH) for patients with treatment-naïve endometrial cancer.
Randomized equivalence clinical trial – results from the Laparoscopic Approach to Cancer of the Endometrium (LACE) trial
760 patients with stage I treatment-naïve endometrial cancer were randomized to either receive TLH (407 women) or TAH (353 women). The primary outcome was disease-free survival, defined as the time between surgery and first recurrence (disease progression or development of a new primary cancer or death). At 4.5 years out, 81.3% of the TAH group and 81.6% of the TLH group were disease-free respectively. With a difference of only 0.3%, the two approaches were considered equivalent. There were no statistically significant differences in recurrence of endometrial cancer between the groups nor overall survival. While 2 patients in the TLH group had metastases in the port site, 2 women in the TAH group had metastases in the surgical site. Overall survival was 92.4% in the TAH group and 92.0% in the TLH group. The authors conclude that use of TLH for women with stage I endometrial cancer is supported by the data in this study.
The editorial makes the point that laparoscopic hysterectomy has been available since the 1990’s with demonstrated improved perioperative outcomes compared to abdominal hysterectomy for benign disorders. Previous results from the LACE study likewise showed no difference in intraoperative complications, but shorter hospital stays (2 vs. 5 days), and fewer postoperative adverse events (13% vs. 19%) in addition to overall improvement in quality of life in the TLH group. Also, like some previous studies, TLH procedures tend to take longer compared to TAH. The editorial notes that cases where the uterus is larger than 10 weeks gestation (excluded from this study) should be ‘approached with greater caution’. Likewise, TLH in this study was performed by a highly trained group of gynecologic oncologists and reflect a particular skill set that is not generalizable to all surgeons.
JAMA Editorial: Laparoscopic Hysterectomy for Endometrial Cancer: A Procedure 25 Years in the Making
OBG Project CME requires a modern web browser (Internet Explorer 10+, Mozilla Firefox, Apple Safari, Google Chrome, Microsoft Edge). Certain educational activities may require additional software to view multimedia, presentation, or printable versions of their content. These activities will be marked as such and will provide links to the required software. That software may be: Adobe Flash, Apple QuickTime, Adobe Acrobat, Microsoft PowerPoint, Windows Media Player, or Real Networks Real One Player.
This educational activity may contain discussion of published and/or investigational uses of agents that are not indicated by the FDA. The planners of this activity do not recommend the use of any agent outside of the labeled indications.
The opinions expressed in the educational activity are those of the faculty and do not necessarily represent the views of the planners. Please refer to the official prescribing information for each product for discussion of approved indications, contraindications, and warnings.
Participants have an implied responsibility to use the newly acquired information to enhance patient outcomes and their own professional development. The information
presented in this activity is not meant to serve as a guideline for patient management. Any procedures, medications, or other courses of diagnosis or treatment discussed or suggested in this activity should not be used by clinicians without evaluation of their patient’s conditions and possible contraindications and/or dangers in use, review of any applicable manufacturer’s product information, and comparison with recommendations of other authorities.
Jointly provided by
