A Comparison of Open Surgery, Robotic-Assisted Surgery and Conventional Laparoscopic Surgery in the Treatment of Morbidly Obese Endometrial Cancer Patients

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES The intent of this retrospective study was to assess the operative outcomes of morbidly obese endometrial cancer patients who were treated with either open surgery (OS) or a minimally invasive procedure. METHODS Morbidly obese (body mass index [BMI] > 40 kg/m(2)) patients with endometrial cancer who underwent OS, robotic-assisted laparoscopic surgery (RS), or conventional laparoscopic surgery (LS) were eligible. We sought to discern any outcome differences with regard to operative time, perioperative complications, and hospital stay. RESULTS Sixteen patients were treated with LS (BMI = 47.9 kg/m(2)), 13 were managed via RS (BMI = 51.2 kg/m(2)), and 24 underwent OS (BMI = 53.7 kg/m(2)). The OS (1.35 hours) patients had a significantly shorter operative duration than the LS (1.82 hours) and RS (2.78 hours) patients (P < .001); blood loss was greater in the OS (250 mL) group in comparison with the RS (100 mL) and LS (175 mL) patients (P = .002). Moreover, the OS (4 days) subjects had a significantly longer hospital stay than the LS (2 days) and RS (2 days) patients (P = .002). CONCLUSION In the present study, we ascertained that minimally invasive surgery was associated with longer operative times but lower rates of blood loss and shorter hospital stay duration compared with treatment comprising an open procedure.