Objective:This study aimed to assess the impact of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) on survival rates in women diagnosed with endometrial cancer (EC).Methods:A retrospective cohort of 723 women who underwent MIS for EC was analyzed, with 468 having conventional laparoscopy (LPS) and 255 undergoing robotic-assisted laparoscopy (RAL). Sociodemographic features, tumor characteristics, and survival rates were examined for the entire cohort and in a propensity score-matched model.Results:In the overall sample, women who underwent RAL were older, had higher BMI, more comorbidities, and more aggressive tumors. After matching for age, BMI, comorbidities, ASA score, histological type, grade, myometrial invasion, LVSI, and FIGO stage, 482 patients (241 matched pairs) were selected. Disease-free survival (DFS) HR: 1, overall survival (OS) HR: 0.9, and specific survival related to EC (SS) HR: 0.15 were similar between the LPS and RAL groups.Conclusions:These findings suggest that the choice of surgical approach (robotic or laparoscopic) does not impact survival outcomes when matched in homogeneous groups.
目的：本研究旨在评估微创手术对子宫内膜癌女性患者生存率的影响。方法：回顾性分析723例接受微创手术的子宫内膜癌患者队列，其中468例接受传统腹腔镜手术，255例接受机器人辅助腹腔镜手术。对全队列及倾向评分匹配模型中的社会人口学特征、肿瘤特征及生存率进行分析。结果：在整体样本中，接受机器人辅助手术的患者年龄更大、BMI更高、合并症更多且肿瘤侵袭性更强。经年龄、BMI、合并症、ASA评分、组织学类型、分级、肌层浸润、淋巴脉管间隙浸润及FIGO分期匹配后，共纳入482例患者（241对匹配病例）。腹腔镜组与机器人辅助组在无病生存期（风险比1.0）、总生存期（风险比0.9）及子宫内膜癌特异性生存期（风险比0.15）方面均无显著差异。结论：研究结果表明，在匹配的同类患者群体中，手术方式（机器人或腹腔镜）的选择不影响生存结局。
肿瘤(癌症)患者之家