The introduction of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) for the treatment of patients with cancer more than 2 decades ago generated enthusiasm as well as considerable concerns regarding its effectiveness and safety.1 Subsequent randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing laparoscopy with open surgery in colon and endometrial cancer reported fewer complications and shorter recovery times for laparoscopy vs open surgical procedures and no overall difference in survival between the 2 approaches.2-4 These trials provided reassuring evidence regarding the noninferiority of MIS to open procedures and were followed by a rapid adoption of MIS for the treatment of gynecologic cancers worldwide.
Identify all potential conflicts of interest that might be relevant to your comment.
Conflicts of interest comprise financial interests, activities, and relationships within the past 3 years including but not limited to employment, affiliation, grants or funding, consultancies, honoraria or payment, speaker's bureaus, stock ownership or options, expert testimony, royalties, donation of medical equipment, or patents planned, pending, or issued.
Err on the side of full disclosure.
If you have no conflicts of interest, check "No potential conflicts of interest" in the box below. The information will be posted with your response.
Not all submitted comments are published. Please see our commenting policy for details.
Karam A, Dorigo O. Minimally Invasive Surgery for Gynecologic Cancers—A Cautionary Tale. JAMA Oncol. 2020;6(7):991–993. doi:10.1001/jamaoncol.2020.1617
Coronavirus Resource Center
Customize your JAMA Network experience by selecting one or more topics from the list below.
Create a personal account or sign in to: