PURPOSE: Compared to laparotomic surgery, laparoscopically assisted radical vaginal hysterectomy (LARVH) offers decreased blood loss during surgery and faster convalescence of the patient postoperatively, while at the same time delivering similar oncologic results. However, there is no data on outcome and toxicity of LARVH followed by (chemo)radiation. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 55 patients (range 28-78 years) with cervical cancer on FIGO stages IB1-IIIA (Tables 1 and 2) with risk factors were submitted to either external beam radiotherapy alone [EBRT, n = 8 (14%), including paraaortic irradiation, n = 4 (2.2%); EBRT and brachytherapy (BT), n = 33 (60%); BT alone, n = 14 (25.5%)] or chemoradiation after LARVH. RESULTS: At a median follow-up of 4.4 years, the 5-year disease-free survival (DFS) was 81.8% with 84.5% overall survival (OS). Acute grade 3 side effects were seen in 4 patients. These were mainly gastrointestinal (GI) and genitourinary (GU) symptoms. Grade 4 side effects were not observed. CONCLUSION: With similar oncologic outcome data and mostly mild side effects, LARVH followed by (chemo)radiation is a valid alternative in the treatment of cervical cancer patients.
PURPOSE: Compared to laparotomic surgery, laparoscopically assisted radical vaginal hysterectomy (LARVH) offers decreased blood loss during surgery and faster convalescence of the patient postoperatively, while at the same time delivering similar oncologic results. However, there is no data on outcome and toxicity of LARVH followed by (chemo)radiation. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 55 patients (range 28-78 years) with cervical cancer on FIGO stages IB1-IIIA (Tables 1 and 2) with risk factors were submitted to either external beam radiotherapy alone [EBRT, n = 8 (14%), including paraaortic irradiation, n = 4 (2.2%); EBRT and brachytherapy (BT), n = 33 (60%); BT alone, n = 14 (25.5%)] or chemoradiation after LARVH. RESULTS: At a median follow-up of 4.4 years, the 5-year disease-free survival (DFS) was 81.8% with 84.5% overall survival (OS). Acute grade 3 side effects were seen in 4 patients. These were mainly gastrointestinal (GI) and genitourinary (GU) symptoms. Grade 4 side effects were not observed. CONCLUSION: With similar oncologic outcome data and mostly mild side effects, LARVH followed by (chemo)radiation is a valid alternative in the treatment of cervical cancerpatients.
Authors: P. Zola; T. Maggino; M. Sacco; A. Rumore; G. Sinistrero; R. Maggi; F. Landoni; G. Foglia; E. Sartori; J. De Toffoli; M. Franchi; C. Romagnolo; P. Sismondi Journal: Int J Gynecol Cancer Date: 2000-01 Impact factor: 3.437
Authors: W A Peters; P Y Liu; R J Barrett; R J Stock; B J Monk; J S Berek; L Souhami; P Grigsby; W Gordon; D S Alberts Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2000-04 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Frederick B Stehman; Shamshad Ali; Henry M Keys; Laila I Muderspach; Weldon E Chafe; Donald G Gallup; Joan L Walker; Deborah Gersell Journal: Am J Obstet Gynecol Date: 2007-11 Impact factor: 8.661
Authors: Johannes C A Dimopoulos; Gertrude Schirl; Anja Baldinger; Thomas H Helbich; Richard Pötter Journal: Strahlenther Onkol Date: 2009-05-15 Impact factor: 3.621
Authors: F Heinzelmann; G Henke; M von Grafenstein; N Weidner; F Paulsen; A Staebler; S Brucker; M Bamberg; M Weinmann Journal: Strahlenther Onkol Date: 2012-05-23 Impact factor: 3.621
Authors: P Georg; A Boni; A Ghabuous; G Goldner; M P Schmid; D Georg; R Pötter; W Dörr Journal: Strahlenther Onkol Date: 2013-05-25 Impact factor: 3.621
Authors: M P Schmid; B Mansmann; M Federico; J C A Dimopoulous; P Georg; E Fidarova; W Dörr; R Pötter Journal: Strahlenther Onkol Date: 2013-01-25 Impact factor: 3.621