Minimally invasive surgery versus open surgery for uterine sarcomas – a retrospective study - 28/02/26
, Melica Nourmoussavi Brodeur a, Raanan Meyer b, Yael Tal Bliman a, Shannon Salvador a, Susie Lau a, Walter Gotlieb aAbstract |
Objective |
To compare the oncologic outcomes of uterine sarcomas treated with minimally invasive surgery (MIS) versus open surgery.
Methods |
We conducted a retrospective analysis of patients with uterine sarcomas (high-grade endometrial stromal sarcoma and leiomyosarcoma) who underwent surgery between 2003 and 2024. Patients were grouped according to surgical approach: (1) MIS or (2) open surgery. The co-primary endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS).
Results |
A total of 37 patients were included: 23 (62%) underwent open surgery, and 14 (38%) underwent MIS. Baseline characteristics were similar between groups. Disease stages at diagnosis were: stage I in 24 patients (65%), stage II in 5 (13%), stage III in 2 (5%), and stage IV in 6 (17%). PFS did not differ significantly between MIS and open surgery (median 43 months [IQR 11–75] vs. 13 months [IQR 2–25], log-rank p = .378). Median OS was also comparable (70 months [IQR 39–100] for MIS vs. 56 months [IQR 24–88] for open surgery, log-rank p = .625). In Cox regression adjusted for tumor size, stage (I vs. II–IV), and surgical approach, MIS was not associated with differences in PFS (HR 0.44, 95% CI 0.14–1.43) or OS (HR 0.75, 95% CI 0.17–3.13).
Conclusions |
Oncologic outcomes following MIS and open surgery for uterine sarcomas appear similar. Larger studies are needed to confirm these findings.
Le texte complet de cet article est disponible en PDF.Keywords : Leiomyosarcoma, Minimally invasive surgery, Outcome, Robotic assisted surgery, Sarcoma
Plan
Vol 55 - N° 5
Article 103147- mai 2026 Retour au numéroBienvenue sur EM-consulte, la référence des professionnels de santé.
L’accès au texte intégral de cet article nécessite un abonnement.
Déjà abonné à cette revue ?
