When the Minimally Invasive Surgical Approach Isn't Necessarily Best

In two studies of surgically managed gynecologic cancer, MIS was associated with worse long-term outcomes.

The past 20 years have seen an increase in minimally invasive surgery (MIS) and a decrease in open surgery to treat early-stage cervical and ovarian cancer; however, the survival effect of the surgical approach to these two cancers is unclear.

In a systematic review and meta-analysis, investigators identified 15 observational studies (9499 patients) of treatment for early-stage cervical cancer with a median follow-up of ≥2 years. Among women who underwent radical hysterectomy with MIS (49%) or open abdominal surgery (51%) 451 deaths were reported. The hazard ratio for death was 56% higher for MIS than for open surgery (P=0.004). Use of robotic-assisted MIS did not influence the finding.

Another group conducted an observational study using the…

Reviewing Author

Robert L. Barbieri, MD

Disclosures

Grant/Research SupportNational Institutes of Health

Editorial BoardsUpToDate

Robert L. Barbieri, MD

Disclosures

Grant/Research SupportNational Institutes of Health

Editorial BoardsUpToDate

When the Minimally Invasive Surgical Approach Isn't Necessarily Best

Topics

Reviewing Author