Literature DB >> 15196849

A comparison of laparascopic-assisted radical vaginal hysterectomy and radical abdominal hysterectomy in the treatment of cervical cancer.

H Steed1, B Rosen, J Murphy, S Laframboise, D De Petrillo, A Covens.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to compare peri-operative morbidity and recurrence-free survival of early-stage cervical cancer patients treated by laparoscopic-assisted radical vaginal hysterectomy (LARVH) with time-matched radical abdominal hysterectomy (RAH) controls at our center.
METHODS: Since July 1984, all patients with FIGO stage IA/IB cervical cancer undergoing radical surgery by members of our division have been entered into a prospective database. Since November 1996, one surgeon at our center has performed LARVH on all surgically appropriate patients. Non-parametric tests were used. Differences between medians were compared using Wilcoxon Rank Sum test. Statistical analysis used the Kaplan-Meier method to calculate disease-free survival. Differences between survival curves were compared with the log rank test. Statistical significance was defined as P < 0.05.
RESULTS: Between November 1996 and December 2003, 71 and 205 patients have undergone LARVH and RAH, respectively, for FIGO stage IA/IB carcinoma of the cervix. Both groups were similar with respect to age and Quetelet index. There were no differences in tumor size, histology, grade, depth of invasion, lymph node metastases, or surgical margins. All laparoscopic procedures were completed successfully with no conversions to laparotomy. Intra-operative morbidity characteristics analyzed (LARVH vs. RAH) were blood loss 300 ml vs. 500 ml (P < 0.001), operative time 3.5 h vs. 2.5 h (P < 0.001), and intra-operative complications 13% vs. 4% (P < 0.03). Intra-operative complications in the LARVH group included: cystotomy (7), ureteric injury (1), and bowel injury (1). There was no difference in transfusion rates. There was no difference between post-operative infectious and non-infectious complications (LARVH vs. RAH), 9% vs. 5% and 5% vs. 2%, respectively. The median time to normal urine residual was 10 days vs. 5 days (P < 0.001), and the median length of hospital stay was 1 day vs. 5 days (P < 0.001). Twenty-two percent of patients received post-operative radiotherapy for high-risk features in both groups. After a median follow-up of 17 and 21 months, there have been 4 recurrences in the LARVH group and 13 in the RAH (P = NS). The overall 2-year recurrence-free survival was 94% and 94% in the LARVH and RAH groups, respectively (P = NS).
CONCLUSION: Our data demonstrate that early cervical cancer can be treated successfully with LARVH with similar efficacy and recurrence rates to RAH. The major benefits are less intra-operative blood loss and shorter hospital stay. It is a safe procedure with low overall morbidity and complication rates. However, at present, LARVH is associated with an increase in intra-operative complications, and patients may have an increased time to return to normal bladder function.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15196849     DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2004.04.003

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Gynecol Oncol        ISSN: 0090-8258            Impact factor:   5.482


  30 in total

1.  [Impact of surgical approach on prognosis in early-stage cervical cancer].

Authors:  Georg Sauer; Christian Kurzeder; Achim Schneider
Journal:  Strahlenther Onkol       Date:  2019-03       Impact factor: 3.621

Review 2.  Early Cervical Cancer: Current Dilemmas of Staging and Surgery.

Authors:  Tiffany Zigras; Genevieve Lennox; Karla Willows; Allan Covens
Journal:  Curr Oncol Rep       Date:  2017-08       Impact factor: 5.075

3.  Comparison of a novel surgical approach for radical hysterectomy: robotic assistance versus open surgery.

Authors:  Gerald Feuer; Benedict Benigno; Lindal Krige; Patricia Alvarez
Journal:  J Robot Surg       Date:  2009-10-09

4.  Laparoscopic radical hysterectomy has higher risk of perioperative urologic complication than abdominal radical hysterectomy: a meta-analysis of 38 studies.

Authors:  Jong Ha Hwang; Bo Wook Kim
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2020-01-17       Impact factor: 4.584

Review 5.  Early cervical neoplasia: advances in screening and treatment modalities.

Authors:  Brent Tierney; Shannon N Westin; Matthew P Schlumbrecht; Pedro T Ramirez
Journal:  Clin Adv Hematol Oncol       Date:  2010-08

6.  Minimally invasive surgery versus laparotomy for radical hysterectomy in the management of early-stage cervical cancer: Survival outcomes.

Authors:  Benny Brandt; Vasileios Sioulas; Derman Basaran; Theresa Kuhn; Katherine LaVigne; Ginger J Gardner; Yukio Sonoda; Dennis S Chi; Kara C Long Roche; Jennifer J Mueller; Elizabeth L Jewell; Vance A Broach; Oliver Zivanovic; Nadeem R Abu-Rustum; Mario M Leitao
Journal:  Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2020-01-07       Impact factor: 5.482

Review 7.  Innovative laparoscopic surgery in gynecologic oncology.

Authors:  Siobhan M Kehoe; Pedro T Ramirez; Nadeem R Abu-Rustum
Journal:  Curr Oncol Rep       Date:  2007-11       Impact factor: 5.075

8.  Aspects of Therapy for Cervical Cancer in Germany 2012 - Results from a Survey of German Gynaecological Hospitals.

Authors:  M Mangler; N Zech; A Schneider; C Köhler; S Marnitz
Journal:  Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd       Date:  2013-03       Impact factor: 2.915

9.  Comparative evaluation of surgical stress of laparoscopically assisted vaginal radical hysterectomy and lymphadenectomy and laparotomy for early-stage cervical cancer.

Authors:  Cai-Ying Hou; Xiu-Li Li; Feng Jiang; Rong Jie Gong; Xin Yu Guo; Yuan-Qing Yao
Journal:  Oncol Lett       Date:  2011-05-13       Impact factor: 2.967

10.  Complications of laparoscopic radical hysterectomy and lymphadenectomy for invasive cervical cancer: experience based on 317 procedures.

Authors:  H Xu; Y Chen; Y Li; Q Zhang; D Wang; Z Liang
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2007-02-08       Impact factor: 4.584

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.