Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Endometrial carcinoma is the most common gynaecological malignancy. Studies have shown that laparoscopic total hysterectomy, bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy and pelvic lymph node dissection was advantageous compared to laparotomy in reducing length of stay and intraoperative blood loss. However, these studies had a predominantly Caucasian population. A comparison study was conducted among the Singapore population to investigate the differences in oncological and surgical outcomes between these two methods. METHODS: A retrospective, single-centre cohort study was conducted. Records of hospitalised patients with Stage 1 endometrioid carcinoma from 2008 to 2014 were extracted for review. Demographic data and study-specific parameters, including operative time, length of hospitalisation, intraoperative and postoperative complications, pain scores, final staging and recurrence rates, were compared between the two groups. RESULTS: 475 endometrioid carcinoma patients were admitted for surgical staging, among whom 374 fulfilled our inclusion criteria. Out of these patients, 229 underwent laparotomy and 145 underwent laparoscopy. The race, parity and body mass index of both groups were comparable. Patients who underwent laparoscopic surgery reported reduced pain score within two hours postoperatively (p = 0.007) and at Postoperative Days 1, 2 and 3 (p < 0.001). Laparoscopic surgery also illustrated better outcomes such as reduced length of stay (p < 0.001) and reduced intraoperative blood loss (p < 0.001). The operative time, recurrence rate and disease-free intervals were comparable between both groups. CONCLUSION: Laparoscopy offered similar oncological outcomes with superior surgical outcomes compared to laparotomy. It provides a suitable alternative in the surgical staging of endometrioid carcinoma.