Endometrial Carcinoma: Comparison of Surgical Approaches (Laparoscopy vs Laparotomy)

Since the publication of the LAP2 study, a prospective randomized trial, laparoscopy has been considered the gold standard for treating patients with early-stage endometrial cancer (EC). However, no prospective randomized trials have been published reporting comparable data in patients with EC at high risk of recurrence (advanced stages or non-endometrioid histology). Nonetheless, some retrospective studies and a systematic review of the literature have demonstrated that minimally invasive surgery achieves better perioperative outcomes than laparotomy without compromising survival in patients with EC at high risk of recurrence. The aim of this multicenter retrospective observational study is to evaluate the safety of minimally invasive surgery in treating EC at low, intermediate, and high risk of recurrence according to the ESMO-ESGO classification, based on cases treated in hospitals within the Emilia Romagna region. Specifically, we aim to assess the effects of a minimally invasive surgical approach compared to laparotomy in terms of: 1. Perioperative and postoperative complications: including the need for transfusions during and/or after surgery, duration of surgery, fever exceeding 38°C for more than 48 hours, and length of hospitalization. 2. Long-term oncological outcomes: including overall survival, disease-free survival, recurrence rates, recurrence sites, and time to recurrence. This comparison will include patients treated for both endometrioid and non-endometrioid EC to provide a comprehensive evaluation of minimally invasive surgery versus laparotomy. By delineating the safety and efficacy of laparoscopic techniques, particularly for higher-risk patients, this research could refine surgical standards and guide clinical decision-making, emphasizing evidence-based practices for tailored patient care. The study also aligns with broader efforts to optimize cancer management in regional and national healthcare settings.