Surgical Management of Grade 2 Endometrioid Endometrial Cancer, Stage IA (< 50% Myometrial Invasion) in a 68-Year-Old Woman
Perform total hysterectomy with bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy as the primary surgical treatment; lymphadenectomy is optional and not required for this intermediate-risk patient, though sentinel lymph node mapping may be considered. 1
Primary Surgical Procedure
The cornerstone operation consists of:
- Total abdominal hysterectomy with bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy 1, 2
- Peritoneal washings for cytology at the start of surgery 1, 2
- Thorough exploration and palpation of the abdominal cavity, including inspection of the peritoneum, omentum, and lymph nodes 1, 2
- Minimally invasive approach (laparoscopic or robotic) is preferred over laparotomy when feasible, offering equivalent oncologic outcomes with reduced morbidity 1, 3
Lymph Node Assessment Decision Algorithm
For this 68-year-old patient with grade 2, stage IA endometrioid cancer:
- Systematic pelvic and para-aortic lymphadenectomy is NOT required because randomized trials demonstrate no survival benefit in early-stage disease 1, 3
- Sentinel lymph node biopsy is a reasonable option (category 2B) if the surgeon has expertise in the technique 1
- Full lymphadenectomy may be considered if intraoperative findings reveal unexpected high-risk features (deep invasion, cervical involvement, or extrauterine disease) 1
- The risk of lymph node metastasis in stage IA grade 2 disease with < 50% invasion is approximately 5-10%, making routine lymphadenectomy of uncertain benefit 1, 3
Critical Intraoperative Considerations
The surgeon must:
- Assess depth of myometrial invasion visually and by palpation 1
- Examine the cervix for gross involvement (which would upstage to stage II) 1
- Inspect the ovaries and fallopian tubes for synchronous tumors 1, 4
- Evaluate for any extrauterine disease that would change staging 1
Pathologic Evaluation Requirements
The final pathology report must document:
- Depth of myometrial invasion (confirm < 50%) 1
- Presence and extent of lymphovascular space invasion (LVSI) 1, 3
- Cervical stromal involvement 1
- Tumor size and location 1, 5
- Peritoneal cytology results 1
- Nodal status if lymph nodes were resected 1
Risk Stratification After Surgery
This patient falls into the intermediate-risk category (stage IA, grade 2, < 50% invasion) according to the 2016 ESMO-ESGO-ESTRO consensus classification 1, 3
Adjuvant therapy decisions depend on final pathology:
- If LVSI is negative: Vaginal brachytherapy is the preferred adjuvant treatment, though observation alone is acceptable for patients < 60 years 1, 3
- If LVSI is unequivocally positive: The patient is reclassified as high-intermediate risk and should receive vaginal brachytherapy or limited-field external beam radiotherapy 1, 3
- If depth of invasion is confirmed ≥ 50%: The patient becomes stage IB and requires adjuvant vaginal brachytherapy 1, 2
Age-Specific Considerations for This 68-Year-Old Patient
- At age 68, this patient is at higher risk for pelvic recurrence compared to younger women with identical pathology 1, 6
- Adjuvant radiotherapy reduces pelvic recurrence from approximately 27% to 3% in elderly patients with intermediate-risk disease 6
- Radiotherapy is well-tolerated in elderly patients, with only 1-3% experiencing significant late toxicity 6
- Given her age ≥ 60 years, vaginal brachytherapy should be strongly recommended even if other risk factors are minimal 1, 3
Common Pitfalls to Avoid
- Do not perform routine systematic lymphadenectomy in apparent stage IA grade 2 disease, as it does not improve survival and adds morbidity 1, 3
- Do not omit bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy in this postmenopausal patient; ovarian preservation is only considered in premenopausal women with grade 1 disease 3
- Do not rely on preoperative grade alone—up to 25% of cases are upgraded after final pathology, so intraoperative assessment must guide surgical extent 3
- Do not skip peritoneal washings, even though positive cytology no longer affects FIGO staging, as it may influence adjuvant therapy decisions 1