Abstract
Purpose
Endometrial cancer (EC) is the most common gynecological malignancy in women, with increasing incidence in the last decades. Surgical therapy is the mainstay of the initial management. The present study analyzed the evolving trends of surgical therapy in Germany in patients diagnosed with EC recorded in a nationwide registry.
Methods
All patients with the diagnosis of EC undergoing open surgery, laparoscopic surgery, and robotic-assisted laparoscopic surgery between 2007 and 2018 were identified by international classification of diseases (ICD) or specific operational codes (OPS) within the database of the German federal bureau of statistics.
Results
A total of 85,204 patients underwent surgical therapy for EC. Beginning with 2013, minimal-invasive surgical therapy was the leading approach for patients with EC. Open surgery was associated with a higher risk of in-hospital mortality (1.3% vs. 0.2%, p < 0.001), of prolonged mechanical ventilation (1.3% vs. 0.2%, p < 0.001), and of prolonged hospital stay (13.7 ± 10.2 days vs. 7.2 ± 5.3 days, p < 0.001) compared to laparoscopic surgery. A total of 1551 (0.04%) patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery were converted to laparotomy. Procedure costs were highest for laparotomy, followed by robotic-assisted laparoscopy and laparoscopy (8286 ± 7533€ vs. 7083 ± 3893€ vs. 6047 ± 3509€, p < 0.001).
Conclusion
The present study revealed that minimal-invasive surgery has increasingly become the standard surgical procedure for patients with EC in Germany. Furthermore, minimal-invasive surgery had superior in-hospital outcomes compared to laparotomy. Moreover, the use of robotic-assisted laparoscopic surgery is increasing, with a comparable in-hospital safety profile to conventional laparoscopy.
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
The present analysis shows that minimal-invasive surgery has increasingly become the standard surgical technique for patients with EC in Germany, with excellent in-hospital outcomes in clinical practice. Robotic-assisted laparoscopy is an emerging surgical procedure in Germany with promising results compared to conventional laparoscopy. |
Introduction
Endometrial cancer (EC) is the most common gynecological malignancy in Europe and continues to be a major cause of morbidity and mortality [1]. The estimated number of new EC cases in Europe in 2018 was 121 578, accounting for 29 638 deaths. The incidence of EC has been rising steadily, with an aging population and increased obesity [1]. In 1988, the FIGO introduced the concept of surgical staging of EC in order to provide reliable information about the pathological morphology of the primary tumor and lymph node status, as well as the resulting prognosis and possible indication for adjuvant therapy [2, 3]. Over the last decades, minimal-invasive surgical approaches came increasingly into use. Favorable complication rates, shorter hospital stay, and comparable outcomes compared to open surgery turned laparoscopy into the standard surgical approach [4, 5].
A survey conducted by the German Gynecologic Laparoscopy Working Group highlighted the fact that more than 50% of the surgical procedures for EC in Germany in 2012 were carried out by laparoscopy [6]. Laparoscopy has been found to have similar outcomes to laparotomy for early-stage [4, 7,8,9,10,11] EC in terms of survival and complications. The European (European Society of Gynaecological Oncology, European Society of Medical Oncology, European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology, European Society of Pathology) and German guidelines for the management of patients with EC recommend minimal-invasive surgery as the preferred surgical approach for patients with early-stage disease [1, 12,13,14]. Current evidence suggests that robotic-assisted surgery may be advantageous in specific patient groups, such as obese patients, where conventional laparoscopic surgery may be more difficult to perform [15].
The main aim of this study was to analyze and describe the evolving trends in the surgical treatment of EC in Germany from 2007 and 2018, with special emphasis on the surgical technique and perioperative outcomes.
Methods
Since 2005, data on all hospitalizations in Germany are available for scientific use via the Diagnosis-Related Groups statistics collected by the Research Data Center of the Federal Bureau of Statistics (DESTATIS). These hospitalization data, including diagnoses and procedures, are a valuable source of representative nationwide data on the in-hospital treatment of patients. This database represents a virtually complete collection of all hospitalizations in German hospitals that are reimbursed according to the Diagnosis-Related Groups system. From this database, we extracted data on patients with EC [ICD-10 (International classification of diseases, Version 10) C54*] who underwent surgical therapy [Operation and Procedure Codes (OPS) 5–683.0, 5–683.1, or 5–683.2] by laparotomy, laparoscopy, or by robotic-assisted laparoscopy (OPS 5–987). Finally, three groups of patients who underwent surgery for EC were compared: patients who underwent laparotomy, patients who underwent laparoscopy, and patients who underwent robotic-assisted laparoscopy.
Our study did not involve direct access by the investigators to data on individual patients, the Research Data Center solely provided access to summary results. Therefore, approval by an ethics committee and informed consent were not applicable, in accordance with German law. All summary results were anonymized by DESTATIS. In practice, this means that any information allowing the drawing of conclusions about a single patient or a specific hospital was censored by DESTATIS in order to guarantee data protection. Moreover, in order to prevent the possibility to draw conclusions to a specific hospital, the data are verified and situationally censored by DESTATIS.
In-hospital mortality, length of mechanical ventilation during operation and postoperative discharge destination, length of hospital stay, and reimbursement were part of DESTATIS’ main set of variables. Hence, our analysis focused on six different endpoints: in-hospital mortality, mechanical ventilation, discharge destination (home, other hospital or rehabilitation facility), length of hospital stay, and reimbursement. The baseline characteristics were used to calculate the Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) in order to assess general patients health status [16].
No imputation for missing values could be conducted due to the absence of codes indicating that data were missing. If the patients electronic health record did not include information on a clinical characteristic, it was assumed that that characteristic was not present. Time trends were calculated using linear regression models. Between-group differences of patient characteristics and in-hospital outcomes were calculated using unpaired t-test and Fisher’s exact test without adjustment for multiple testing. Thus, p-values may not be interpreted as confirmatory but are descriptive in nature. All statistical analyses were performed with Stata 16 (StataCorp, College Station, Texas, USA).
Results
Trends of surgical therapy techniques for EC in Germany between 2007 and 2018
Between 2007 and 2018, a total of 85 204 patients underwent surgical therapy for EC in Germany (Fig. 1). While the overall number of surgical procedures for EC increased from 6499 surgeries in 2007 to 8032 surgeries in 2018 (p < 0.001), the annual number of laparotomies decreased from 5412 in 2007 to 2497 in 2018 (p < 0.001), with the number of minimal-invasive surgical procedures increasing from 1087 in 2007 to 5364 in 2018 (p < 0.001) (Fig. 1). In 2011, robotic-assisted laparoscopic procedures were first recorded in the database. The number of robotic-assisted laparoscopic procedures increased from 55 in 2011 to 171 in 2018, but still account to a very low share of all minimal-invasive surgical procedures, 3.2% in 2018 (Fig. 1).
Baseline characteristics
In comparison to patients with EC undergoing laparotomy, patients who underwent laparoscopic surgery were significantly younger (p < 0.001) and were at lower risk of severe outcome and death according to the Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) (p < 0.001). Among the patients undergoing minimal-invasive surgery, patients undergoing robotic-assisted laparoscopy were significantly younger (p < 0.001) and at higher risk of severe outcome and death according to the CCI (p < 0.001) (Table 1).
In-hospital outcomes laparotomy versus laparoscopic surgery for EC
Patients undergoing laparotomy for EC were associated with a higher risk of in-hospital mortality compared to patients with EC who underwent laparoscopy (1.3% vs. 0.2%, p < 0.001). The share of postoperative prolonged mechanical ventilation was higher in the group of patients who underwent laparotomy compared to the group of patients who underwent laparoscopy (1.3% vs. 0.2%, p < 0.001). A total of 1551 patients (0.04%) undergoing laparoscopy were converted to laparotomy. Patients who underwent laparotomy had a longer hospital stay (13.7 ± 10.2 days vs. 7.2 ± 5.3 days, p < 0.001) and were more likely to be discharged toward another hospital or rehabilitation facility (p < 0.001) compared to patients who underwent laparoscopy (Table 2).
Outcomes of conventional laparoscopy and robotic-assisted laparoscopy for EC
None of the patients with EC staged by robotic-assisted laparoscopy died since the first recorded procedure in 2011 (Table 2). The proportion of patients with EC who required prolonged ventilation was similar in both treatment groups (0.2% laparoscopy vs. < 0.4% robotic-assisted laparoscopy, p = 0.70) (Table 2). No patient with EC who underwent robotic-assisted laparoscopy was converted to open surgery. The use of robotic-assisted surgery did not alter length of hospital stay compared to laparoscopic surgery (7.2 ± 5.3 days vs. 7.3 ± 5.9 days, p = 0.84). Patients undergoing robotic-assisted laparoscopy were more likely to be discharged home compared to patients undergoing laparoscopy (p = 0.01) (Table 2). Robotic-assisted laparoscopy is associated with higher procedure costs in comparison to laparoscopic surgery (robotic-assisted laparoscopy: 7083 ± 3893€; laparoscopy: 6047 ± 3509€, p < 0.001) (Table 2).
Discussion
The present study analyzed the trends in surgical therapy and in-hospital outcomes of patients undergoing surgery for EC in Germany. Analysis of a nationwide dataset, including all cases who underwent surgery for EC between 2007 and 2018, revealed that minimal-invasive surgical procedures have increasingly become the standard surgical procedure for patients with EC. Furthermore, minimal-invasive staging surgery had superior in-hospital outcomes compared to laparotomy. Moreover, the use of robotic-assisted laparoscopy is increasing with comparable in-hospital safety profile to laparoscopy. This evidence is in line with data from other European countries [17].
EC is a major cause of morbidity and mortality, since it is a common cancer in women with rising incidence [18, 19]. Accordingly, we found increasing number of surgical procedures for EC during the analyzed period of time in Germany, possibly linked to an increasing incidence of the disease.
Although we found increasing use of robotic-assisted laparoscopy from 2011 until 2018, the share of robotic-assisted laparoscopies in all patients with EC in Germany was 3.2%. Compared to other countries, in Germany there is a long-lasting tradition in minimal-invasive techniques in gynecological surgery, especially in laparoscopic surgery [20]. This might be a reason for the relative slow increase in robotic-assisted laparoscopies for EC.
Two randomized trials showed the superiority of laparoscopic surgery with respect to in-hospital complications and quality of life compared to laparotomy for EC [21, 22]. The present study confirms these findings in real-world practice. Patients with EC who underwent minimally-invasive surgery had lower in-hospital mortality and were less frequently prolonged ventilated after surgery compared to patients who underwent laparotomy. A conversion to open surgery was a rare event and occurred in only 0.04% of all patients with EC who underwent laparoscopy. Moreover, the length of hospital stay was almost halved after minimal-invasive approach compared to laparotomy. These differences may occur, on one hand, a result of the surgical technique (laparotomy vs. minimally-invasive surgery). On the other hand, since the patients in the laparotomy group had a significantly higher CCI and the initial tumor stage was not available for the present analysis, there might be other reasons that lead to the indication of a specific surgical technique and thus lead to the described results.
Although robotic-assisted laparoscopy was less frequently used in the current study, in-hospital outcomes are comparable with conventional laparoscopic surgery for patients with EC. Until 2018 no reported death among patients with EC undergoing robotic-assisted surgery in Germany was recorded. Furthermore, no conversion from robotic-assisted laparoscopy to open surgery was necessary in accordance with available evidence [23, 24].
The nationwide introduction of robotic-assisted surgical staging in Denmark changed the surgical approach for early-stage EC from open surgery to minimal-invasive surgery [25]. This change in surgical approach was associated with a significantly reduced risk of severe complications [25]. Current evidence from the Danish Gynecological Database showed that the nationwide introduction of robotic-assisted laparoscopy for EC was associated with improved survival compared to open surgery [26]. This intriguing observation warrants further investigation.
The cost-effectiveness of robotic-assisted surgery is controversial and varies greatly in different surgical fields [27]. Our study suggests that robotic-assisted laparoscopy for EC is more cost effective compared to open surgery. However, a benefit in comparison to conventional laparoscopy has yet to be proven [28].
Strengths and limitations
The strengths of this study include the analysis of a large nationwide dataset, with over 85 000 patients with EC, over a time span of 12 years. The dataset is well controlled by independent supervision. Therefore, it is reliable in respect to clinical characteristics and outcome risk analyses according to the three treatment groups. Several limitations need to be considered. Analyses were performed in a registry study setting from a national database according to ICD and OPS codes. Important clinical factors of patients with EC, e.g., tumor stage, initial extent of the disease, and subsequent adjuvant therapies, are missing in the present dataset precluding a balancing of the groups. Thus, the direct comparison between the three groups of patients has limitations, since higher tumor stage and disease extent at initial diagnosis determine the surgical technique. Furthermore, there was no follow-up available in order to evaluate long-term oncological outcomes of the three treatment groups.
The present analysis shows that minimal-invasive surgery has increasingly become the standard surgical technique for patients with EC in Germany, with excellent in-hospital outcomes in clinical practice. Robotic-assisted laparoscopy is an emerging surgical procedure in Germany with promising results compared to conventional laparoscopy.
Data availability
Not applicable.
References
Concin N, Matias-Guiu X, Vergote I et al (2021) ESGO/ESTRO/ESP guidelines for the management of patients with endometrial carcinoma. Int J Gynecol Cancer 31:12–39
Abu-Rustum NR, Zhou Q, Iasonos A et al (2011) The revised 2009 FIGO staging system for endometrial cancer: should the 1988 FIGO stages IA and IB be altered? Int J Gynecol Cancer 21:511–516
Rungruang B, Olawaiye AB (2012) Comprehensive surgical staging for endometrial cancer. Rev Obstet Gynecol 5:28–34
Walker JL, Piedmonte MR, Spirtos NM et al (2012) 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 30:695–700
Capozzi VA, Sozzi G, Gambino G et al (2019) Laparoscopy versus laparotomy for surgical treatment of obese women with endometrial cancer: a cost-benefit comparative analysis. Mol Clin Oncol 11:335–342
Juhasz-Boss I, Mallmann P, Moller CP, Solomayer EF (2013) Use of laparoscopy in the treatment of endometrial and cervical cancer - results of a 2012 Germany-wide survey. Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd 73:911–917
Galaal K, Donkers H, Bryant A, Lopes AD (2018) Laparoscopy versus laparotomy for the management of early stage endometrial cancer. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 10: CD006655
Palomba S, Falbo A, Mocciaro R et al (2009) Laparoscopic treatment for endometrial cancer: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Gynecol Oncol 112:415–421
Asher R, Obermair A, Janda M, Gebski V (2018) Disease-free and survival outcomes for total laparoscopic hysterectomy compared with total abdominal hysterectomy in early-stage endometrial carcinoma: a meta-analysis. Int J Gynecol Cancer 28:529–538
Nasioudis D, Frey MK, Chapman-Davis E et al (2020) Outcomes of minimally invasive surgery for patients with endometrial carcinoma involving the cervix. Int J Gynecol Cancer 30:619–625
He H, Zeng D, Ou H et al (2013) Laparoscopic treatment of endometrial cancer: systematic review. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 20:413–423
https://www.leitlinienprogramm-onkologie.de/leitlinien/endometriumkarzinom/ accessed 04.05.2023
Oaknin A, Bosse TJ, Creutzberg CL, Giornelli G, Harter P, Joly F, Lorusso D, Marth C, Makker V, Mirza MR, Ledermann JA, ESMO Guidelines Committee (2022) Colombo N endometrial cancer: ESMO clinical practice guideline for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol. 33:860–877
Scharl S, Sprötge T, Gerken M, Scharl A, Ignatov A, Inwald EC, Ortmann O, Kölbl O, Klinkhammer-Schalke M, Papathemelis T (2022) Factors influencing treatment decision and guideline conformity in high-grade endometrial cancer patients: a population-based study. Arch Gynecol Obstet 305:203–213
Zanagnolo V, Achilarre MT, Maruccio M, Garbi A (2018) Might robotic-assisted surgery become commonplace in endometrial cancer treatment? Expert Rev Anticancer Ther 18:507–509
Charlson ME, Pompei P, Ales KL, MacKenzie CR (1987) A new method of classifying prognostic comorbidity in longitudinal studies: development and validation. J Chronic Dis 40:373–383
Rabinovich A (2015) Minimally invasive surgery for endometrial cancer. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol 27:302–307
Bogani G, Multinu F, Dowdy SC et al (2016) Incorporating robotic-assisted surgery for endometrial cancer staging: analysis of morbidity and costs. Gynecol Oncol 141:218–224
Wright JD, Burke WM, Wilde ET et al (2012) Comparative effectiveness of robotic versus laparoscopic hysterectomy for endometrial cancer. J Clin Oncol 30:783–791
Lehmann-Willenbrock E, Riedel HH, Mecke H, Semm K (1992) Pelviscopy/laparoscopy and its complications in Germany, 1949–1988. J Reprod Med 37:671–677
Walker JL, Piedmonte MR, Spirtos NM et al (2009) Laparoscopy compared with laparotomy for comprehensive surgical staging of uterine cancer: gynecologic oncology Group Study LAP2. J Clin Oncol 27:5331–5336
Janda M, Gebski V, Brand A et al (2010) Quality of life after total laparoscopic hysterectomy versus total abdominal hysterectomy for stage I endometrial cancer (LACE): a randomised trial. Lancet Oncol 11:772–780
Lawrie TA, Liu H, Lu D et al. (2019) Robot-assisted surgery in gynaecology. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 4: CD011422
Liu H, Cao Y, Li L, Bai Y, Liu J (2022) Effectiveness of robotic surgery for endometrial cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Arch Gynecol Obstet 305:837–850
Jorgensen SL, Mogensen O, Wu C et al (2019) Nationwide introduction of minimally invasive robotic surgery for early-stage endometrial cancer and its association with severe complications. JAMA Surg 154:530–538
Jorgensen SL, Mogensen O, Wu CS et al (2019) Survival after a nationwide introduction of robotic surgery in women with early-stage endometrial cancer: a population-based prospective cohort study. Eur J Cancer 109:1–11
Ramsay C, Pickard R, Robertson C et al (2012) Systematic review and economic modelling of the relative clinical benefit and cost-effectiveness of laparoscopic surgery and robotic surgery for removal of the prostate in men with localised prostate cancer. Health Technol Assess 16:1–313
Knight J, Escobar PF (2014) Cost and robotic surgery in gynecology. J Obstet Gynaecol Res 40:12–17
Funding
Open Access funding enabled and organized by Projekt DEAL. The authors declare that no funds, grants, or other support were received during the preparation of this manuscript.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
KR contributed to study design, data acquisition, data analysis, data interpretation, manuscript writing, and final approval of the manuscript. KK was responsible for statistical analysis, interpretation of the data, manuscript writing, and final approval of the manuscript. PS was involved in study design, data acquisition, data analysis, data interpretation, and final approval of the manuscript. CvzM performed data acquisition, data analysis, manuscript drafting, and final approval of the manuscript. PJ performed data analysis, manuscript drafting, and final approval of the manuscript. JG was involved in data interpretation, manuscript drafting, and final approval of the manuscript. MK contributed to supervision, data interpretation, critical revision, manuscript drafting, and final approval of the manuscript. IJB was responsible for data acquisition, data analysis, manuscript drafting, and final approval of the manuscript. FAT contributed to study design, data acquisition, data analysis, data interpretation, manuscript writing, and final approval of the manuscript.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
All the authors declare no conflicts of interest.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
About this article
Cite this article
Roth, K., Kaier, K., Stachon, P. et al. Evolving trends in the surgical therapy of patients with endometrial cancer in Germany: analysis of a nationwide registry with special emphasis on perioperative outcomes. Arch Gynecol Obstet 308, 1635–1640 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-023-07127-0
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-023-07127-0