Comparative outcomes in older and younger women undergoing laparotomy or robotic surgical staging for endometrial cancer

Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2016 Mar;214(3):350.e1-350.e10. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2015.09.085. Epub 2015 Nov 18.

Abstract

Background: Older patients are at increased risk of perioperative morbidity and mortality. There are limited data on the safety of a robotic approach in the staging for endometrial cancer.

Objective: We compared outcomes in women undergoing laparotomy or robotic surgical staging for endometrial cancer.

Study design: Using the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project National Inpatient Sample database from 2008 through 2010, we abstracted records for patients who had surgery for endometrial cancer with either a robotic approach or laparotomy. Patients were categorized by age (<65 vs ≥65 years and 5-year increments). Medical comorbidity scores were calculated using the Charlson Comorbidity Index. Outcomes included intraoperative/perioperative/medical complications, death, length of stay (LOS), and discharge disposition. Student t and χ(2) tests were used to compare groups and approach. Multiple analysis of variance models were used to compare differences between robotics and laparotomy and age groups.

Results: We identified 16,980 patients who had surgery for endometrial cancer with either a robotic approach (age ≥65 years, n = 1228; age <65 years, n = 1574) or laparotomy (age ≥65 years, n = 5914; age <65 years, n = 8264). Older patients had a higher Charlson Comorbidity Index score at the time of surgery (2.6 vs 2.5, P < .001). In laparotomy cases, intraoperative complication rates were similar (4.1% vs 3.7%, P = .17). Older patients had higher rates of perioperative surgical (20.5% vs 15.4%, P < .001) and medical (23.3% vs 15.5%, P < .001) complications, longer LOS (5.1 vs 4.2 days, P < .001), and lower rates of discharge to home (71.2% vs 90.1%, P < .001). In robotic cases, rates of intraoperative complications were similar (5.9% vs 6.8%, P = .32). Older patients had higher rates of perioperative surgical (8.3% vs 5.2%, P = .001) and medical (12.3% vs 6.7%, P = .001) complications, longer LOS (2.00 vs 1.67 days, P < .001), and lower rates of discharge to home (88.8% vs 96.8%, P < .001). With both approaches, as age increased, perioperative surgical and medical complications also increased in a linear fashion. In a subanalysis of older patients (n = 7142), there were lower rates of perioperative surgical (8.3% vs 20.5%, P < .001) and medical (12.3% vs 23.3%, P < .001) complications, death (0.0% vs 0.8%, P < .001), shorter LOS (2.00 vs 5.13 days, P < .001) and higher rate of discharge to home (88.8% vs 71.2%, P < .001) in robotic compared to laparotomy cases.

Conclusion: Although the risks of surgery increase with age, in patients age ≥65 years, a robotic approach for endometrial cancer appears to be safe given current selection criteria utilized in the United States.

Keywords: comparative outcomes; endometrial cancer; morbidity and mortality; older patients; robotic surgery.

Publication types

  • Comparative Study

MeSH terms

  • Adult
  • Age Factors
  • Aged
  • Aged, 80 and over
  • Databases, Factual
  • Endometrial Neoplasms / mortality
  • Endometrial Neoplasms / pathology
  • Endometrial Neoplasms / surgery*
  • Female
  • Humans
  • Intraoperative Complications / epidemiology
  • Intraoperative Complications / etiology
  • Laparotomy*
  • Length of Stay / statistics & numerical data
  • Middle Aged
  • Neoplasm Staging
  • Postoperative Complications / epidemiology
  • Postoperative Complications / etiology
  • Robotic Surgical Procedures*
  • Treatment Outcome