Peri-operative and survival outcomes analysis of patients with endometrial cancer managed by three surgical approaches: a long-term Bulgarian experience.

The study aim was to assess the peri-operative, oncologic, and survival outcomes for patients with endometrial cancer (EC) managed by abdominal hysterectomy (AH), laparoscopic hysterectomy (LH), or robotic hysterectomy (RH) approaches at premier centers in Bulgaria. We analyzed histologically diagnosed EC cases operated via any of the three surgical methods during 2008-2019. Data analyses included patients and tumor characteristics, peri-operative outcomes, and disease status. We grouped FIGO stages I and II to represent early-stage EC and to investigate their survival. Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression analyses were performed to determine disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS). Consecutive 917 patients (AH = 466; LH = 60, RH = 391) formed the basis of study analyses. Most of demographics and tumor characteristics of the patients were comparable across the groups except few minor variations (e.g., LH/RH cases were younger, heavier, more stage IA, endometrioid, G1, low-risk group). LH and RH group cases had significantly lower operative time than AH (p < 0.001), shorter hospital length-of-stay (p < 0.001), higher post-operative Hgb (p < 0.001). RH cases had fewer blood transfusions than AH or LH (p < 0.001). Cox multivariate analyses indicate that OS was not influenced by the type of surgical approach. Despite the fact that the DFS in "early-stage" EC is significantly better in AH group than RH, the type of surgery (i.e., AH, LH, or RH) for "all stages" is insignificant factor for DFS. With our long-term experience, minimally invasive surgical approach resulted in superior peri-operative, oncologic, and survival outcomes. Specifically, RH is not only safe in terms of post-operative results, but also for mortality and oncologic rates.

Analysis of abdominal vs. robotic radical hysterectomies for patients with cervical cancer: a Bulgarian experience.

To assess and compare the peri-operative, oncologic, and survival outcomes for women with cervical cancer (CC) treated with abdominal radical hysterectomy (ARH) versus robotic radical hysterectomy (RRH) approaches in Bulgaria. We retrospectively analyzed patients with histologically diagnosed CC operated via ARH or RRH methods during January-2008 to April-2019. The data analyzed include patients and tumor characteristics, peri-operative outcomes, and disease status. Kaplan-Meier method and Cox regression analysis were performed to determine disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS). There were consecutive 1347 patients (ARH = 1006, RRH = 341), which formed the basis of study analyses. Women in the RRH group had significantly shorter median hospital length-of-stay than ARH cases (7 vs. 11 days, p < 0.001), higher post-operative hemoglobin (116 vs. 108 g/L, p < 0.001), and fewer blood transfusions (7.3% vs. 21.5%, p < 0.001), respectively. The overall incidence of post-operative complications was also lower in the RRH vs. ARH group (2.1% vs. 9.4%, p < 0.001). Median follow-up time for ARH vs. RRH groups was 4.32 vs. 5.24 years, respectively (p < 0.001). Kaplan-Meier analysis demonstrated that the RRH cohort had a significantly higher survival rate compared to the ARH group (CC-specific death 8.5% vs. 16.5% respectively). Mean time to recurrence did not differ significantly in either surgical approach (p = 0.495). Cox multivariate regression showed no significant impact of surgical approach on DFS or OS. No significant difference in DFS or OS between ARH vs. RRH for CC was observed. RRH approach does not lead to inferior oncologic outcomes and is associated with better peri-operative outcomes. In regard to "all stages" of CC, we found robotic surgery safer compared to laparotomy, and thus consider RRH a better surgical treatment option for patients with CC.