Oncological Safety of Intrauterine Manipulator Use in Laparoscopic Hysterectomy for Endometrial Cancer: A Propensity Score-Matched Analysis

<i>Background and Objectives</i>: Minimally invasive surgery is considered the standard of care for early-stage endometrial cancer. However, the oncological safety of intrauterine manipulator (IUM) use during laparoscopic hysterectomy remains controversial. The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of intrauterine manipulator use during laparoscopic hysterectomy on oncological outcomes in patients with clinically early-stage endometrial cancer. <i>Materials and Methods</i>: In this retrospective cohort study, 612 patients with FIGO 2009 stage I-III endometrial cancer who underwent staging surgery at a tertiary center between January 2010 and May 2025 were included. Clinical and pathological characteristics were compared between laparoscopy (<i>n</i> = 168) and laparotomy (<i>n</i> = 444). To reduce selection bias, propensity score matching (PSM) was performed based on age, histological subtype, and FIGO stage. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis and Cox regression modeling were utilized to evaluate disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS). <i>Results</i>: After matching, groups were balanced except for higher rates of para-aortic lymphadenectomy and adjuvant therapy in the laparotomy group. IUM use was not associated with increased LVSI or positive peritoneal cytology. Recurrence was more frequent after laparoscopy (10.1% vs. 6.0%, <i>p</i> = 0.028), with inferior 5-year DFS (87.6% vs. 97.4%, HR 5.60, <i>p</i> = 0.0006), while OS was similar (82.0% vs. 87.6%, <i>p</i> = 0.842). In multivariate Cox analysis, independent predictors of worse DFS were non-endometrioid histology (HR 3.57), FIGO stage III (HR 3.06), grade 3 tumors (HR 2.63), and laparoscopic surgery (HR 0.51). For OS, non-endometrioid histology (HR 5.12), stage III disease (HR 2.98), and grade 3 tumors (HR 4.51) were independent adverse factors, whereas surgical approach was not. <i>Conclusions</i>: The use of an intrauterine manipulator in laparoscopic hysterectomy for early-stage endometrial cancer was linked to worse DFS but not OS. These findings suggest caution regarding the routine use of IUMs and highlight the need for prospective randomized trials to clarify their oncological safety.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Medicina
Published
2025-10-11
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3390/medicina61101820
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Endometrial and Cervical Cancer Treatments
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
2.06
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Oncological Safety of Intrauterine Manipulator Use in Laparoscopic Hysterectomy for Endometrial Cancer: A Propensity Score-Matched Analysis

Serenat Eriş Yalçın, Yakup Yalçın, Kemal Özerkan
1 citations
Medicina
Endometrial and Cervical Cancer Treatments
2.06
article

Oncological Safety of Intrauterine Manipulator Use in Laparoscopic Hysterectomy for Endometrial Cancer: A Propensity Score-Matched Analysis

Serenat Eriş Yalçın, Yakup Yalçın, Kemal Özerkan
article en
1 citations

Abstract

<i>Background and Objectives</i>: Minimally invasive surgery is considered the standard of care for early-stage endometrial cancer. However, the oncological safety of intrauterine manipulator (IUM) use during laparoscopic hysterectomy remains controversial. The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of intrauterine manipulator use during laparoscopic hysterectomy on oncological outcomes in patients with clinically early-stage endometrial cancer. <i>Materials and Methods</i>: In this retrospective cohort study, 612 patients with FIGO 2009 stage I-III endometrial cancer who underwent staging surgery at a tertiary center between January 2010 and May 2025 were included. Clinical and pathological characteristics were compared between laparoscopy (<i>n</i> = 168) and laparotomy (<i>n</i> = 444). To reduce selection bias, propensity score matching (PSM) was performed based on age, histological subtype, and FIGO stage. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis and Cox regression modeling were utilized to evaluate disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS). <i>Results</i>: After matching, groups were balanced except for higher rates of para-aortic lymphadenectomy and adjuvant therapy in the laparotomy group. IUM use was not associated with increased LVSI or positive peritoneal cytology. Recurrence was more frequent after laparoscopy (10.1% vs. 6.0%, <i>p</i> = 0.028), with inferior 5-year DFS (87.6% vs. 97.4%, HR 5.60, <i>p</i> = 0.0006), while OS was similar (82.0% vs. 87.6%, <i>p</i> = 0.842). In multivariate Cox analysis, independent predictors of worse DFS were non-endometrioid histology (HR 3.57), FIGO stage III (HR 3.06), grade 3 tumors (HR 2.63), and laparoscopic surgery (HR 0.51). For OS, non-endometrioid histology (HR 5.12), stage III disease (HR 2.98), and grade 3 tumors (HR 4.51) were independent adverse factors, whereas surgical approach was not. <i>Conclusions</i>: The use of an intrauterine manipulator in laparoscopic hysterectomy for early-stage endometrial cancer was linked to worse DFS but not OS. These findings suggest caution regarding the routine use of IUMs and highlight the need for prospective randomized trials to clarify their oncological safety.

MedicinaVol. 61(10)
Bursa Uludağ Üni̇versi̇tesi̇ (TR)
Openalex Percentile: Top 11%
Endometrial and Cervical Cancer Treatments
2.06
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.