Advertisement

Influence of uterine manipulator on oncological outcome in minimally invasive surgery of endometrial cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

      Abstract

      Aim

      The endoscopic approach for early-stage endometrial cancer (EC) treatment is considered gold standard. Some authors expressed their concern regarding uterine manipulator (UM) as a risk factor for tumor spillage and dissemination allowing peritoneal or lympho-vascular spaces invasion (LVSI). This meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the effect of UM on the presence of LVSI, recurrence rate and presence of atypical or malignant peritoneal cytology in patients with endometrial cancer.

      Methods

      We searched electronic databases including PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, EBSCO, Google Scholar, and ClinicalTrials.gov. The pooled results were used to evaluate the association between the use of UM and oncological outcomes. This systematic review was reported according to PRISMA statement 2020. Statistical meta-analysis was performed using Review Manager software.

      Results

      This systematic review included 18 studies (3 prospective studies, 13 retrospective studies, and 2 RCT). The pooled results showed no significant difference (RR: 0.86, 95% CI, 0.69 to 1.08) in the incidence of LVSI between manipulated hysterectomy and total abdominal hysterectomy (TAH) and between UM group and non-UM group in minimally invasive surgery (RR: 1.18, 95% CI, 0.76 to 1.85), no significant difference in the rate of recurrence (RR: 1.11, 95% CI, 0.71 to 1.74), in the incidence of positive peritoneal cytology between manipulated and non-manipulated hysterectomies in minimally invasive surgery (RR: 1.89, 95% CI, 0.74 to 4.83) and before and after the use of uterine manipulator (RR: 1.21, 95% CI, 0.68 to 2.16). We found a positive association between malignant cytology and hysterectomies in which a uterine manipulator had been used in a sub-group analysis where LH/LAVH were compared to TAH. (RR = 2.26, 95% CI, 1.08–4.71. P = 0.03).

      Conclusions

      This meta-analysis supports that the use of uterine manipulator for minimally invasive treatment of endometrial cancer does not increase the rate of recurrence and LVSI. Therefore, the opportunity of any other studies on its use in endometrial cancer women should be questioned.

      Keywords

      Abbreviations:

      UM (uterine manipulator), LVSI (lymphovascular space invasion), MIS (minimally invasive surgery), CI (confidence interval), FIGO (International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics), NOS (Newcastle-Ottawa Scale), RR (Risk Ratio), RCT (randomized controlled trials), TAH (total abdominal hysterectomy), LAVH (laparoscopically assisted vaginal hysterectomy), LH (laparoscopic hysterectomy), RH (robotic hysterectomy)
      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'

      Subscribe:

      Subscribe to European Journal of Surgical Oncology
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect

      References

        • Walker J.L.
        • Piedmonte M.R.
        • Spirtos N.M.
        • Eisenkop S.M.
        • Schlaerth J.B.
        • Mannel R.S.
        • et al.
        Laparoscopy compared with laparotomy for comprehensive surgical staging of uterine cancer: Gynecologic Oncology Group Study LAP2.
        J Clin Oncol. 2009; 27 (Nov 10): 5331-5336https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2009.22.3248
        • Walker J.L.
        • Piedmonte M.R.
        • Spirtos N.M.
        • Eisenkop S.M.
        • Schlaerth J.B.
        • Mannel R.S.
        • et al.
        Recurrence and survival after random assignment to laparoscopy versus laparotomy for comprehensive surgical staging of uterine cancer: Gynecologic Oncology Group LAP2 Study.
        J Clin Oncol. 2012; 30 (Mar 1): 695-700https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2011.38.8645
        • Delair D.
        • Soslow R.A.
        • Gardner G.J.
        • Barakat R.R.
        • Leitao Jr., M.M.
        Tumoral displacement into fallopian tubes in patients undergoing robotically assisted hysterectomy for newly diagnosed endometrial cancer.
        Int J Gynecol Pathol. 2013; 32 (Mar): 188-192https://doi.org/10.1097/PGP.0b013e31825f7c08
        • Krizova A.
        • Clarke B.A.
        • Bernardini M.Q.
        • James S.
        • Kalloger S.E.
        • Boerner S.L.
        • et al.
        Histologic artifacts in abdominal, vaginal, laparoscopic, and robotic hysterectomy specimens: a blinded, retrospective review.
        Am J Surg Pathol. 2011; 35 (Jan): 115-126https://doi.org/10.1097/PAS.0b013e31820273dc
        • Sonoda Y.
        • Zerbe M.
        • Smith A.
        • Lin O.
        • Barakat R.R.
        • Hoskins W.J.
        High incidence of positive peritoneal cytology in low-risk endometrial cancer treated by laparoscopically assisted vaginal hysterectomy.
        Gynecol Oncol. 2001; 80 (Mar): 378-382https://doi.org/10.1006/gyno.2000.6079
        • van den Haak L.
        • Alleblas C.
        • Nieboer T.E.
        • Rhemrev J.P.
        • Jansen F.W.
        Efficacy and safety of uterine manipulators in laparoscopic surgery: a review.
        Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2015; 292 (Nov): 1003-1011https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-015-3727-9
        • Guntupalli S.R.
        • Zighelboim I.
        • Kizer N.T.
        • Zhang Q.
        • Powell M.A.
        • Thaker P.H.
        • et al.
        Lymphovascular space invasion is an independent risk factor for nodal disease and poor outcomes in endometrioid endometrial cancer.
        Gynecol Oncol. 2012; 124 (Jan): 31-35https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ygyno.2011.09.017
        • Colombo N.
        • Creutzberg C.
        • Amant F.
        • et al.
        ESMO-ESGO-ESTRO Consensus conference on endometrial cancer: diagnosis, treatment and follow-up.
        Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2016; 26: 2-30https://doi.org/10.1097/IGC.0000000000000609
        • Colombo N.
        • Preti E.
        • Landoni F.
        • Carinelli S.
        • Colombo A.
        • Marini C.
        • et al.
        ESMO guidelines working group. Endometrial cancer: ESMO clinical practice guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up.
        Ann Oncol. 2013; 24 (Oct) (PMID: 24078661): vi33-v38https://doi.org/10.1093/annonc/mdt353
        • Tinelli R.
        • Cicinelli E.
        • Tinelli A.
        • Bettocchi S.
        • Angioni S.
        • Litta P.
        Laparoscopic treatment of early-stage endometrial cancer with and without uterine manipulator: our experience and review of literature.
        Surg Oncol. 2016; 25 (Jun): 98-103https://doi.org/10.1016/j.suronc.2016.03.005
        • Gueli Alletti S.
        • Perrone E.
        • Fedele C.
        • Cianci S.
        • Pasciuto T.
        • Chiantera V.
        • et al.
        A multicentric randomized trial to evaluate the ROle of uterine MANipulator on laparoscopic/robotic HYsterectomy for the treatment of early-stage endometrial cancer: the ROMANHY trial.
        Front Oncol. 2021; 11 (Sep. 10)720894https://doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2021.720894
        • Uccella S.
        • Bonzini M.
        • Malzoni M.
        • Fanfani F.
        • Palomba S.
        • Aletti G.
        • et al.
        The effect of a uterine manipulator on the recurrence and mortality of endometrial cancer: a multi-centric study by the Italian Society of Gynecological Endoscopy.
        Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2017; 216 (Jun) (592.e1-592.e11)https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2017.01.027
        • Seifi F.
        • Parkash V.
        • Clark M.
        • Menderes G.
        • Tierney C.
        • Silasi D.A.
        • et al.
        Pseudovascular invasion: minimally invasive surgery for endometrial cancer.
        J Soc Laparoendosc Surg. 2019; 23 (Apr-Jun) (00021)e2019https://doi.org/10.4293/JSLS.2019.00021
        • Lee M.
        • Kim Y.T.
        • Kim S.W.
        • Kim S.
        • Kim J.H.
        • Nam E.J.
        Effects of uterine manipulation on surgical outcomes in laparoscopic management of endometrial cancer: a prospective randomized clinical trial.
        Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2013; 23 (Feb): 372-379https://doi.org/10.1097/IGC.0b013e3182788485
        • Marcos-Sanmartín J.
        • López Fernández J.A.
        • Sánchez-Payá J.
        • Piñero-Sánchez Ó.C.
        • Román-Sánchez M.J.
        • Quijada-Cazorla M.A.
        • et al.
        Does the type of surgical approach and the use of uterine manipulators influence the disease-free survival and recurrence rates in early-stage endometrial cancer?.
        Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2016; 26: 1722-1726https://doi.org/10.1097/igc.0000000000000808
        • Padilla-Iserte P.
        • Lago V.
        • Tauste C.
        • et al.
        Spanish society of gynecology and Obstetrics Spanish investigational network gynecologic oncology group. Impact of uterine manipulator on oncological outcome in endometrial cancer surgery.
        Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2021; 224 (Jan) (65.e1-65.e11)https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2020.07.025
        • Kitahara S.
        • Walsh C.
        • Frumovitz M.
        • Malpica A.
        • Silva E.G.
        Vascular pseudoinvasion in laparoscopic hysterectomy specimens for endometrial carcinoma: a grossing artifact?.
        Am J Surg Pathol. 2009; 33 (Feb): 298-303https://doi.org/10.1097/PAS.0b013e31818a01bf
        • Page M.J.
        • McKenzie J.E.
        • Bossuyt P.M.
        • et al.
        The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews.
        Syst Rev. 2021; 10 (Mar 29): 89https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-021-01626-4
        • Wells G.A.
        • Shea B.
        • O'Connell D.
        • et al.
        The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) for assessing the quality of nonrandomized studies in meta-analyses.
        (Ottawa Hospital Research Institute website)
        • Machida H.
        • Hom M.S.
        • Adams C.L.
        • Eckhardt S.E.
        • Garcia-Sayre J.
        • Mikami M.
        • et al.
        Intrauterine manipulator use during minimally invasive hysterectomy and risk of lymphovascular space invasion in endometrial cancer.
        Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2018; 28 (Feb): 208-219https://doi.org/10.1097/IGC.0000000000001181
        • Zhang C.
        • Havrilesky L.J.
        • Broadwater G.
        • Di Santo N.
        • Ehrisman J.A.
        • Lee P.S.
        • et al.
        Relationship between minimally invasive hysterectomy, pelvic cytology, and lymph vascular space invasion: a single institution study of 458 patients.
        Gynecol Oncol. 2014; 133: 211-215https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ygyno.2014.02.025
        • Momeni M.
        • Kolev V.
        • Cardenas-Goicoechea J.
        • Getrajdman J.
        • Fishman D.
        • Chuang L.
        • et al.
        Does the type of surgery for early-stage endometrial cancer affect the rate of reported lymphovascular space invasion in final pathology specimens?.
        Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2013; 208 (Jan) (e1-6): 71https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2012.10.009
        • Machida H.
        • Casey J.P.
        • Garcia-Sayre J.
        • Jung C.E.
        • Casabar J.K.
        • Moeini A.
        • et al.
        Timing of intrauterine manipulator insertion during minimally invasive surgical staging and results of pelvic cytology in endometrial cancer.
        J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2016; 23 (Feb 1): 234-241https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmig.2015.10.002
        • Lim S.
        • Kim H.S.
        • Lee K.B.
        • Yoo C.W.
        • Park S.Y.
        • Seo S.S.
        Does the use of a uterine manipulator with an intrauterine balloon in total laparoscopic hysterectomy facilitate tumor cell spillage into the peritoneal cavity in patients with endometrial cancer?.
        Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2008; 18 (Sep-Oct): 1145-1149https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1525-1438.2007.01165.x
        • Eltabbakh G.H.
        • Mount S.L.
        Laparoscopic surgery does not increase the positive peritoneal cytology among women with endometrial carcinoma.
        Gynecol Oncol. 2006; 100 (Feb): 361-364https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ygyno.2005.08.040
        • Shinohara S.
        • Sakamoto I.
        • Numata M.
        • Ikegami A.
        • Teramoto K.
        Risk of spilling cancer cells during total laparoscopic hysterectomy in low-risk endometrial cancer.
        Gynecol. Minimal. Invasive Theraphy. 2017; 6: 113-115https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gmit.2016.10.002
        • Logani S.
        • Herdman A.V.
        • Little J.V.
        • Moller K.A.
        Vascular “pseudo invasion” in laparoscopic hysterectomy specimens: a diagnostic pitfall.
        Am J Surg Pathol. 2008; 32: 560-565https://doi.org/10.1097/PAS.0b013e31816098f0
        • Hopkins M.R.
        • Richmond A.M.
        • Cheng G.
        • Davidson S.
        • Spillman M.A.
        • Sheeder J.
        • et al.
        Lymphovascular space invasion in robotic surgery for endometrial cancer.
        J Soc Laparoendosc Surg. 2014; 18 (Jul-Sep) (00021)e2014https://doi.org/10.4293/JSLS.2014.00021
        • Folkins A.K.
        • Nevadunsky N.S.
        • Saleemuddin A.
        • Jarboe E.A.
        • Muto M.G.
        • Feltmate C.M.
        • et al.
        Evaluation of vascular space involvement in endometrial adenocarcinomas: laparoscopic vs abdominal hysterectomies.
        Mod Pathol. 2010; 23 (Aug): 1073-1079https://doi.org/10.1038/modpathol.2010.91
        • Bogani G.
        • Scambia G.
        • Cimmino C.
        • Fanfani F.
        • Costantini B.
        • Loverro M.
        • et al.
        Characteristics and patterns of care of endometrial cancer before and during COVID-19 pandemic.
        J Gynecol Oncol. 2022; 33 (Jan) (e10)https://doi.org/10.3802/jgo.2022.33.e10
        • Lupini L.
        • Scutiero G.
        • Iannone P.
        • Martinello R.
        • Bassi C.
        • Ravaioli N.
        • et al.
        Molecular biomarkers predicting early development of endometrial carcinoma: a pilot study.
        Eur J Cancer Care. 2019; 28 (Nov)e13137https://doi.org/10.1111/ecc.13137
        • Greco P.
        • Martinello R.
        • Indraccolo U.
        • Borghi C.
        • Bonaccorsi G.
        • Scutiero G.
        Outcome of endometrial cancer after lymphadenectomy: a single center retrospective analysis with long-lasting follow-up.
        Minerva Ginecol. 2017; 69 (Oct): 405-412https://doi.org/10.23736/S0026-4784.17.04028-X
        • Nappi L.
        • Angioni S.
        • De Feo V.
        • Greco P.
        • Stabile G.
        • Greco F.
        • et al.
        Diagnostic accuracy of hysteroscopy vs dilation and curettage (D&C) for atypical endometrial hyperplasia in patients performing hysterectomy or serial follow-up.
        Clin Exp Obstet Gynecol. 2022; 49 (024)https://doi.org/10.31083/j.ceog4901024
        • Penolazzi L.
        • Bonaccorsi G.
        • Gafà R.
        • Ravaioli N.
        • Gabriele D.
        • Bosi C.
        • et al.
        SLUG/HIF1-α/miR-221 regulatory circuit in endometrial cancer.
        Gene. 2019; 711 (Aug 30)143938https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gene.2019.06.028