Uterine Manipulator in Endometrial Cancer Surgery: Pro MUCEI Study
NCT ID: NCT05242276
Last Updated: 2023-10-10
Study Results
The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.
Basic Information
Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.
RECRUITING
1200 participants
OBSERVATIONAL
2022-03-20
2026-03-20
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
A retrospective study demonstrated how uterine manipulator use in early-stage endometrial cancer (FIGO I-II) for minimally invasive surgery was associated with a worse oncologic outcome in patients with uterus-confined endometrial cancer (FIGO I-II) who underwent minimally invasive surgery.
The main objective of this study is to prospectively confirm the results obtained retrospectively, assessing the relapse rate in these patients related to the use or not of a uterine manipulator during the endometrial surgery. Secondary, the presence of risk factors that contraindicate the use of the uterine manipulator will also be evaluated.
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
Uterine Manipulator Versus No Uterine Manipulator in Endometrial Cancer Trial
NCT05687084
Role of Uterine Manipulator in Hysterectomy - Ro.Man.HY
NCT02762214
Effect of a Uterine Manipulator on the Incidence of Lymphovascular Propagation (LVSI) in Treatment of Endometrial Cancer
NCT05261165
Comparison of Five-year Survival and Disease-free Survival in Patients Diagnosed With Endometrium Cancer Who Underwent Total Laparoscopic Hysterectomy With and Without Uterine Manipulator
NCT06307886
Fertility Sparing Management of EndomeTrial Cancer and Hyperplasia
NCT04362046
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
With the introduction of minimally invasive approaches in gynecological oncology treatments, this uterine device has been utilized for endometrial and cervical cancers, with controversy regarding its influence on the spread of tumoral cells and the risk of recurrence. Recently, the LACC trial showed a worse than expected oncological outcome after a laparoscopic/robotic approach in early stage cervical cancer.5 One of the hypotheses generated was that the uterine manipulator might influence this worse prognosis.6 The retrospective European Succor study found the use of a manipulator was associated with a decrease in disease-free survival in cervical cancer in the minimally invasive group.7 Therefore, there are reasonable doubts about the uterine manipulator's safety in hysterectomy performed due to cancer.
In endometrial cancer, the presence of the uterine device in a cavity lined with neoplastic tissue leads to a potential tumor-manipulator interaction. Multiple mechanisms are potentially involved in this relationship but are poorly understood, however, the concept of uterus-confined disease is important to evaluate these interactions.8 Nonetheless, we have limited evidence from retrospectives studies about the uterine manipulator in endometrial cancer surgery, in which no impact of the uterine manipulator's use on oncological outcome has been found.9-12 To date, it remains a controversial conclusion that the theoretical tumor manipulation has no clear impact on oncological prognosis in endometrial cancer.
As is already known in other gynecological tumors (such as early-stage epithelial ovarian cancer or morcellation in unexpected uterine sarcoma), when the confined disease is exposed to the peritoneal cavity, the oncological outcome worsens.29 Therefore, the concept of organ-confined disease is an essential idea to understand our results. In early-stage endometrial cancer, the myometrium acts as a containment barrier, which may be iatrogenically injured by the uterine manipulator.
The MUCEI study by Padilla et al. suggests that the use of a uterine manipulator is associated with worse oncological outcomes in patients with uterus-confined endometrial cancer (FIGO I-II) at the time of surgery; it also presented a lower recurrence-free survival and lower overall survival, regardless of the type of manipulator with no differences in the pattern of recurrence.
The study observed a worse prognosis when the uterine manipulator was used in patients with the uterine-confined disease (FIGO I-II), not present in those patients with the no-confined disease (FIGO III) at the time of surgery. These results support the concept that the uterine manipulator might act in breaking the uterine-confined disease and worsen the oncological outcomes.
The different potential interferences may explain the alteration of the myometrial barrier by the uterine device. Therefore, two hypotheses are presented to explain this relationship between the uterine manipulator and endometrial cancer.
The first is the macroscopic injury hypothesis. During the insertion of any uterine manipulator (with or without balloon) and its use (especially in the atrophic uterus), the manipulator´s shank may weaken the myometrium, iatrogenically leading to uterine rupture and the opening of the tumor to the peritoneal cavity and surgical field.30,31 The uterine rupture is rarely reflected in surgical reports, and it has not been considered in previous analyses. Machida et al. showed a 0.4-1% perforation rate with a balloon manipulator,32 thus, other factors could be involved.
The second hypothesis is the microscopical pathway of dissemination. The uterine device generates a significant increase in pressure inside the endometrial cavity, generating global distension according to Pascal´s principle, which is additionally increased by the maintained push needed during uterine mobilization and colpotomy.33 This increased pressure might be involved in the improved ability of tumor cells to exceed the myometrial barrier, spreading outside the uterus cavity by a passive effect through the fallopian tubes and lymphovascular space.34
Methodology Prospective and non-randomized multicenter descriptive and analytical study in which the characteristics of the patients, the details associated with the surgery, and the oncological results will be studied depending on the use or not of the uterine manipulator.
The non-randomization is due to the fact that the procedure to be evaluated is surgeon-dependent, so the criteria for the use of the uterine manipulator or not will depend on the surgeon according to the protocol of his center. In other words, inclusion in the study does not modify the surgical practice in the patient.
Inclusion criteria include women with endometrial cancer diagnosed with stage I-II in a previous pre-surgical biopsy, the surgery has been performed and there are complete data on surgery, pathological anatomy, and follow-up.
Exclusion criteria include any patient with suspected disease beyond the uterus in the preoperative assessment or confirmed during surgical exploration. Cases without pathological confirmation of endometrial cancer in the final surgical specimen, or final histology of atypical hyperplasia/endometrial intraepithelial neoplasia will not be accepted.
Patients with open surgery, conversion to laparotomy, or vaginal hysterectomy alone will also be excluded.
The surgical variables collected will be: use of uterine manipulator (the type of uterine manipulator and classification of subtypes with or without intrauterine balloon), sealing of the fallopian tubes, surgical staging, intraoperative complications, surgical time and hospital stay. Collection of postoperative complications by Clavien-Dindo Classification. The final histological data of the surgery will be collected according to the type and grade of the tumor according to the WHO classification, the invasion of the myometrium, the presence of invasion of the lymphovascular space, sentinel (+/- ultrastaging) and the number of pelvic lymph nodes. and para-aortic. The Bokhman dual classification of endometrial cancer will be used. and tumors were classified by FIGO staging. Finally, data on adjuvant treatment (vaginal brachytherapy, external beam radiation (ERBT), and chemotherapy scheme), follow-up time, relapse time, and type and pattern of relapse.
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
CASE_CONTROL
PROSPECTIVE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
uterine manipulator cohort
Patients with early-stage endometrial cancer who have performed a hysterectomy with a uterine manipulator to mobilize the uterus during the surgery.
USE OF UTERINE MANIPULATOR DURING THE HYSTERECTOMY
The uterine manipulator is a device commonly used in minimally invasive hysterectomy surgery for endometrial cancer. However, without substantial evidence to support its use, surgeons are required to make decisions about its use based only on their personal choice and surgical experience. . It is inserted vaginally through the cervical canal into the endometrial cavity. The uterine manipulator facilitates the uterus mobilization during the surgery, generating tension on the main supporting elements of the uterus to improve surgical field exposure and provide a landmark for the colpotomy.
no uterine manipulator cohort
Patients with early-stage endometrial cancer who have performed a hysterectomy without a uterine manipulator to mobilize the uterus during the surgery.
No interventions assigned to this group
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
USE OF UTERINE MANIPULATOR DURING THE HYSTERECTOMY
The uterine manipulator is a device commonly used in minimally invasive hysterectomy surgery for endometrial cancer. However, without substantial evidence to support its use, surgeons are required to make decisions about its use based only on their personal choice and surgical experience. . It is inserted vaginally through the cervical canal into the endometrial cavity. The uterine manipulator facilitates the uterus mobilization during the surgery, generating tension on the main supporting elements of the uterus to improve surgical field exposure and provide a landmark for the colpotomy.
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
2. \- Previous pre-surgical biopsy with a diagnosis of endometrial cancer.
3. \- The surgery has been performed and there are complete data on surgery, pathological anatomy, and follow-up of at least 2 years.
Exclusion Criteria
Patients with open surgery, conversion to laparotomy, or vaginal hysterectomy alone will also be excluded.
FEMALE
No
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
Instituto de Investigacion Sanitaria La Fe
OTHER
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Pablo Iserte Padilla
Principal Investigator
Principal Investigators
Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.
Pablo Padilla iserte, MD, PhD
Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
Hospital Universitario La Fe
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
Hospital universitario y politécnico La Fe
Valencia, , Spain
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
Central Contacts
Reach out to these primary contacts for questions about participation or study logistics.
Facility Contacts
Find local site contact details for specific facilities participating in the trial.
References
Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.
Padilla-Iserte P, Lago V, Tauste C, Diaz-Feijoo B, Gil-Moreno A, Oliver R, Coronado P, Martin-Salamanca MB, Pantoja-Garrido M, Marcos-Sanmartin J, Gilabert-Estelles J, Lorenzo C, Cazorla E, Roldan-Rivas F, Rodriguez-Hernandez JR, Sanchez L, Muruzabal JC, Hervas D, Domingo S; 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 Jan;224(1):65.e1-65.e11. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2020.07.025. Epub 2020 Jul 18.
Related Links
Access external resources that provide additional context or updates about the study.
A video explaining the causes of the hypothesis about the impact of the uterine manipulator in endometrial cancer patients
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
pro MUCEI (507-21/07/21)
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.