OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the surgical outcome and the oncologic results of total laparoscopic radical hysterectomy (TLRH) after neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy (CRT) for locally advanced cervical carcinoma. METHODS: All patients who underwent TLRH after CRT for stages IIB-IIA and bulky IB diseases were reviewed. The control group for this analysis was a cohort of patients treated with abdominal radical hysterectomy (ARH) after CRT for the same stage cancers. RESULTS: We reviewed 102 patients operated on between 2000 and 2008 (46 TLRH and 56 ARH). Mean age at diagnosis was 44 years, and mean B.M.I was 22.1. There was no difference in tumor characteristics between the two groups. Seven patients in the laparoscopic group required conversion to laparotomy (15%). Mean estimated blood loss (200 vs. 400 mL, p<0.01) and the median duration of hospital stay (5 vs. 8 days, p<0.01) were significantly lower in the laparoscopic group. Morbidity rates and urinary complications were reduced in the laparoscopic group (p=0.04). Local recurrence rates, disease-free and overall survival were comparable in the two groups. Best survival was observed for patients with pathological complete response or microscopic residual disease compared to patients with macroscopic residues (p<0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Radical hysterectomy after CRT is known to be difficult with significant morbidity rates and remains controversial in comparison to exclusive CRT. TLRH after preoperative CRT is feasible for patients with locally advanced cervical cancer in 85% of the cases. For these patients, TLRH compared with ARH was associated with favorable surgical outcome with comparable oncological results.
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the surgical outcome and the oncologic results of total laparoscopic radical hysterectomy (TLRH) after neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy (CRT) for locally advanced cervical carcinoma. METHODS: All patients who underwent TLRH after CRT for stages IIB-IIA and bulky IB diseases were reviewed. The control group for this analysis was a cohort of patients treated with abdominal radical hysterectomy (ARH) after CRT for the same stage cancers. RESULTS: We reviewed 102 patients operated on between 2000 and 2008 (46 TLRH and 56 ARH). Mean age at diagnosis was 44 years, and mean B.M.I was 22.1. There was no difference in tumor characteristics between the two groups. Seven patients in the laparoscopic group required conversion to laparotomy (15%). Mean estimated blood loss (200 vs. 400 mL, p<0.01) and the median duration of hospital stay (5 vs. 8 days, p<0.01) were significantly lower in the laparoscopic group. Morbidity rates and urinary complications were reduced in the laparoscopic group (p=0.04). Local recurrence rates, disease-free and overall survival were comparable in the two groups. Best survival was observed for patients with pathological complete response or microscopic residual disease compared to patients with macroscopic residues (p<0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Radical hysterectomy after CRT is known to be difficult with significant morbidity rates and remains controversial in comparison to exclusive CRT. TLRH after preoperative CRT is feasible for patients with locally advanced cervical cancer in 85% of the cases. For these patients, TLRH compared with ARH was associated with favorable surgical outcome with comparable oncological results.
Authors: Philippe Morice; Philippe Rouanet; Annie Rey; Pascale Romestaing; Gilles Houvenaeghel; Jean Charles Boulanger; Jean Leveque; Didier Cowen; Patrice Mathevet; Jean Pierre Malhaire; Guillaume Magnin; Eric Fondrinier; Jocelyne Berille; Christine Haie-Meder Journal: Oncologist Date: 2012-01-10