首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>Indian Journal of Surgical Oncology >Prospective Nonrandomized Comparative Study of Laparoscopic Versus Open Surgical Staging for Endometrial Cancer in India
【2h】

Prospective Nonrandomized Comparative Study of Laparoscopic Versus Open Surgical Staging for Endometrial Cancer in India

机译:腹腔镜与开放手术分期对子宫内膜癌的前瞻性非随机比较研究

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

Laparoscopic procedures to treat endometrial cancer are currently emerging. At present, we have evidence to do laparoscopic oncologic resections for endometrial cancer as proven by many prospective studies from abroad such as LAP2 by GOG. So, we have decided to assess the safety and feasibility of such a study in our population with the following as our primary objectives: (1) to study whether laparoscopy is better compared to open approach in terms of duration of hospital stay, perioperative morbidity and early recovery from surgical trauma and (2) to study whether the laparoscopic approach is noninferior to the open approach in terms of number of lymph nodes harvested in lymphadenectomy and rate of conversion to open surgery. We did a prospective nonrandomized comparative study of open versus laparoscopy approach for surgical staging of endometrial cancer from 16th May 2013 to 15th May 2015. To prove a significant difference in the hospital stay, we needed 29 patients in each arm. Thirty patients in each arm were enrolled for the study. The median duration of stay in the open arm was 7 days and in the laparoscopy arm it was 5 days. The advantage of 2 days in the laparoscopic arm was statistically significant (P value 0.006). Forty percent of patients in the open arm had to stay in the hospital for more than 7 days whereas only 3% of patients in the laparoscopy arm required to stay for more than 7 days (P value 0.001). This difference was statistically significant. There was no significant difference between the early complication rates between the two arms (20% in open vs. 13% in laparoscopy; P value 0.730). There was a conversion rate of 10% in laparoscopy. The median number of nodes harvested in open arm was 16.50 and in the laparoscopy arm, it was 13.50. The difference was not statistically significant (P value 0.086). Laparoscopy approach for endometrial cancer staging is feasible in Indian patients and the short-term advantages are replicable with same oncologic safety as proved by randomized controlled trials.
机译:腹腔镜手术治疗子宫内膜癌目前正在兴起。目前,我们有证据表明腹腔镜子宫内膜癌的切除术已得到国外许多前瞻性研究的证实,例如GOG的LAP2。因此,我们决定评估该研究在人群中的安全性和可行性,并将其作为主要目标:(1)研究在住院时间,围手术期发病率和尽早从手术创伤中恢复过来;(2)从淋巴结清扫术中收集到的淋巴结数量和转换为开放手术的角度研究腹腔镜手术是否比开放手术逊色。我们于2013年5月16日至2015年5月15日进行了开放式与腹腔镜手术对子宫内膜癌手术分期的前瞻性非随机对照研究。为证明住院时间有显着差异,我们每组需要29名患者。每个研究组招募了30名患者。开放臂的中位停留时间为7天,腹腔镜臂的中位停留时间为5天。腹腔镜臂内治疗2天的优势具有统计学意义(P值0.006)。张开臂的患者中有40%必须在医院呆超过7天,而腹腔镜臂中只有3%的患者需要呆超过7天(P值0.001)。这种差异具有统计学意义。两组的早期并发症发生率之间无显着差异(开放性腹腔镜检查为20%,腹腔镜检查为13%; P值为0.730)。腹腔镜检查的转换率为10%。在开放臂中收获的淋巴结的中位数为16.50,在腹腔镜臂中为13.50。差异无统计学意义(P值0.086)。腹腔镜子宫内膜癌分期方法在印度患者中是可行的,其短期优势是可以复制的,且具有相同的肿瘤学安全性,这已通过随机对照试验证明。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号