Lower limb lymphedema after surgical staging for endometrial cancer: Current insights and future directions.

Lower extremity lymphedema (LEL) is a common complication following surgical staging of endometrial cancer. LEL is a chronic condition associated with significant impact on patient morbidity and quality of life (QoL). This review aimed to report the current evidence in the literature on secondary LEL after surgical staging for endometrial cancer, focusing on the incidence based on different approaches to lymph node staging, diagnosis, risk factors, and the impact on QoL. Due to the absence of a standardized agreement regarding the methodology for evaluating LEL, the documented frequency of occurrence fluctuates across different studies, ranging from 0% to 50%. Systematic pelvic lymphadenectomy appears to be the primary determinant associated with the emergence of LEL, whereas the implementation of sentinel lymph node biopsy has notably diminished the occurrence of this lymphatic complication after endometrial cancer staging. LEL is strongly associated with decreased QoL, lower limb function, and negative body image, and has a detrimental impact on cancer-related distress reported by survivors. Standardization of lymphedema assessment is needed, along with cross-cultural adaptation of subjective outcome measures for self-reported LEL. The advent of sentinel lymph node mapping represents the ideal approach for accurate nodal assessment with less short- and long-term morbidity. Further research is needed to definitively assess the prevalence and risk factors of LEL and to identify strategies to improve limb function and QoL in cancer survivors with this chronic condition.

Conventional Laparoscopy versus Robotic-Assisted Aortic Lymph-Nodal Staging for Locally Advanced Cervical Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Aortic lymph node metastases are a relative common finding in locally advanced cervical cancer. Minimally invasive surgery is the preferred approach to perform para-aortic lymph nodal staging to reduce complications, hospital stay, and the time to primary treatment. This meta-analysis (CRD42022335095) aimed to compare the surgical outcomes of the two most advanced approaches for the aortic staging procedure: conventional laparoscopy (CL) versus robotic-assisted laparoscopy (RAL). The meta-analysis was conducted according to the PRISMA guideline. The search string included the following keywords: "Laparoscopy" (MeSH Unique ID: D010535), "Robotic Surgical Procedures" (MeSH Unique ID: D065287), "Lymph Node Excision" (MeSH Unique ID: D008197) and "Aorta" (MeSH Unique ID: D001011), and "Uterine Cervical Neoplasms" (MeSH Unique ID: D002583). A total of 1324 patients were included in the analysis. Overall, 1200 patients were included in the CL group and 124 patients in the RAL group. Estimated blood loss was significantly higher in CL compared with RAL (p = 0.02), whereas hospital stay was longer in RAL compared with CL (p = 0.02). We did not find significant difference for all the other parameters, including operative time, intra- and postoperative complication rate, and number of lymph nodes excised. Based on our data analysis, both CL and RAL are valid options for para-aortic staging lymphadenectomy in locally advanced cervical cancer.