Laparoscopic vs. open treatment of endometrial cancer in the elderly and very elderly: An age-stratified multicenter study on 1606 women

Stefano Uccella, Matteo Bonzini, Stefano Palomba, Francesco Fanfani, Mario Malzoni, Marcello Ceccaroni, Renato Seracchioli, Annamaria Ferrero, Roberto Berretta, Enrico Vizza, Davide Sturla, Giovanni Roviglione, Giorgia Monterossi, Paolo Casadio, E. Volpi, Daniele Mautone, Giacomo Corrado, Francesco Bruni, Giovanni Scambia, Fabio Ghezzi

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

Objective. To investigate in depth the effect of increasing age on the peri-operative outcomes of laparoscopic treatment for endometrial cancer, compared to open surgery, with stratification of patients according to the different definitions of elderly age used in the literature. Methods: Data of consecutive patients who underwent surgery for endometrial cancer staging at six centers were reviewed and analyzed according to surgical approach (laparoscopic or open), different definitions of elderly and very elderly age (≥. 65. years, ≥. 75. years, ≥. 80. years), and class of age (. 0.05). The same tendency was observed among very-elderly patients (≥. 80. years). Multivariable and propensity score-matched analysis confirmed these findings. Conclusions: Laparoscopy for staging endometrial cancer retains its advantages over open surgery even in elderly and very-elderly patients. Our data strongly suggest that minimally-invasive surgery is advantageous even among subjects ≥. 80. years.

Original languageEnglish
JournalGynecologic Oncology
DOIs
Publication statusAccepted/In press - Feb 5 2016

Keywords

  • Aging
  • Elderly
  • Endometrial cancer
  • Laparoscopy
  • Minimally-invasive
  • Surgery

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Obstetrics and Gynaecology
  • Oncology

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Laparoscopic vs. open treatment of endometrial cancer in the elderly and very elderly: An age-stratified multicenter study on 1606 women'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this