Para-aortic lymphadenectomy did not improve overall survival among women with type I endometrial cancer.

<bold>Objective: </bold>To compare outcomes and prognosis among women with type I endometrial cancer undergoing hysterectomy and bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy (H-BSO) with or without systematic pelvic lymphadenectomy (PLD) or para-aortic lymphadenectomy (PALD).<bold>Methods: </bold>Retrospective review of women postoperatively diagnosed with type I endometrial cancer who underwent H-BSO at a university hospital in Chengdu, China (January 2010 to June 2012). Women were divided into no lymphadenectomy (PLD-/PALD-), systematic pelvic lymphadenectomy (PLD+/PALD-), or combined pelvic and para-aortic lymphadenectomy (PLD+/PALD+) groups. Follow-up was by telephone. Postoperative outcomes and prognosis were compared and risk factors were analyzed.<bold>Results: </bold>In total, 333 women met the inclusion criteria: 121 underwent PLD+/PALD-, 166 underwent PLD+/PALD+, and 46 underwent PLD-/PALD-. There were no differences in pre-operative characteristics among the groups (all P>0.05). The PLD+/PALD+ group had a higher laparotomy rate (P=0.001), the PLD-/PALD- group had shorter operation time (P=0.001) and lower blood loss (P<0.001). There were no differences between the PLD+/PALD- and PLD+/PALD+ groups. Overall, 291 women had sufficient follow-up data; there was no difference in overall survival, and PALD was not a predictor of survival.<bold>Conclusion: </bold>Postoperative outcomes were similar among all surgical groups; a survival benefit of PALD was not demonstrated. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]