Literature DB >> 19224286

Total laparoscopic radical hysterectomy versus abdominal radical hysterectomy with lymphadenectomy in patients with early cervical cancer: our experience.

Mario Malzoni1, Raffaele Tinelli, Francesco Cosentino, Annarita Fusco, Carmine Malzoni.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to retrospectively compare, in a series of 127 consecutive women, the safety, morbidity, and recurrence rate of total laparoscopic radical hysterectomy (TLRH) with lymphadenectomy and abdominal radical hysterectomy with lymphadenectomy (ARH) for early cervical carcinoma.
METHODS: A total of 127 consecutive patients with International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics stage Ia1 (lymphvascular space involvement), Ia2, and Ib1 early cervical cancer, 65 of whom underwent TLRH and 62 of whom underwent ARH with pelvic lymph node dissection, comprised the study population. The para-aortic lymphadenectomy with the superior border of the dissection being the inferior mesenteric artery was performed in all cases with positive pelvic lymph nodes discovered at frozen section evaluation.
RESULTS: The median blood loss in the ARH group (145 ml; range, 60-225 ml) was significantly greater than TLRH group (55 ml; range, 30-80 ml) (P < .01). The median length of hospital stay was significantly greater in the ARH group (7 days; range, 5-9 days) than TLRH group (4 days; range, 3-7 days) (P < .01). The median operating time was 196 min in the TLRH group (range, 182-240 min) compared with 152 min in the ARH group (range, 161-240 min) (P < .01). No statistically significant difference was found between the two groups when the recurrence rate was compared.
CONCLUSIONS: Total laparoscopic radical hysterectomy is a safe and effective therapeutic procedure for management of early-stage cervical cancer with a far lower morbidity than reported for the open approach and is characterized by far less blood loss and shorter postoperative hospitalization time, although multicenter randomized clinical trials with longer follow-up are necessary to evaluate the overall oncologic outcomes of this procedure.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19224286     DOI: 10.1245/s10434-009-0342-7

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol        ISSN: 1068-9265            Impact factor:   5.344


  41 in total

1.  Survival After Minimally Invasive vs Open Radical Hysterectomy for Early-Stage Cervical Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Authors:  Roni Nitecki; Pedro T Ramirez; Michael Frumovitz; Kate J Krause; Ana I Tergas; Jason D Wright; J Alejandro Rauh-Hain; Alexander Melamed
Journal:  JAMA Oncol       Date:  2020-07-01       Impact factor: 31.777

2.  Recent advances of robotic surgery and single port laparoscopy in gynecologic oncology.

Authors:  Yong Wook Jung; Sang Wun Kim; Young Tae Kim
Journal:  J Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2009-09-30       Impact factor: 4.401

3.  Laparoscopic nerve-sparing radical hysterectomy without uterine manipulator for cervical cancer stage IB: description of the technique, our experience and results after the era of LACC trial.

Authors:  Andreas Kavallaris; Nektarios Chalvatzas; Antonios Gkoutzioulis; Dimitrios Zygouris
Journal:  Arch Gynecol Obstet       Date:  2020-10-17       Impact factor: 2.344

4.  Minimally Invasive Radical Hysterectomy for Cervical Cancer: When Adoption of a Novel Treatment Precedes Prospective, Randomized Evidence.

Authors:  Alexander Melamed; J Alejandro Rauh-Hain; Pedro T Ramirez
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2019-09-27       Impact factor: 44.544

5.  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 6.  Surgical Management of Early Cervical Cancer: When Is Laparoscopic Appropriate?

Authors:  Stefano Greggi; Gennaro Casella; Felice Scala; Francesca Falcone; Serena Visconti; Cono Scaffa
Journal:  Curr Oncol Rep       Date:  2020-01-27       Impact factor: 5.075

7.  Current and Future Status of Laparoscopy in Gynecologic Oncology.

Authors:  S Rimbach; K Neis; E Solomayer; U Ulrich; D Wallwiener
Journal:  Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd       Date:  2014-09       Impact factor: 2.915

8.  Ten years of experience with resection of left-sided pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: evolution and initial experience to a laparoscopic approach.

Authors:  Chang Moo Kang; Dong Hyun Kim; Woo Jung Lee
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2010-01-07       Impact factor: 4.584

9.  Clinical observation of laparoscopic radical hysterectomy for cervical cancer.

Authors:  Xiang-Hua Yin; Zhong-Qin Wang; Shi-Zhang Yang; Hong-Yan Jia; Min Shi
Journal:  Int J Clin Exp Med       Date:  2014-05-15

10.  Survival after Minimally Invasive Radical Hysterectomy for Early-Stage Cervical Cancer.

Authors:  Alexander Melamed; Daniel J Margul; Ling Chen; Nancy L Keating; Marcela G Del Carmen; Junhua Yang; Brandon-Luke L Seagle; Amy Alexander; Emma L Barber; Laurel W Rice; Jason D Wright; Masha Kocherginsky; Shohreh Shahabi; J Alejandro Rauh-Hain
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2018-10-31       Impact factor: 91.245

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.