OBJECTIVES: Simple conization represents a plausible treatment scheme for managing stage IA1-2 tumors conservatively. However its curative potential has not been widely exploited as regards stage IB1 lesions. Recent studies suggest that, in selected circumstances, patients with stage IB1 disease undergoing radical hysterectomy could have been safely cured by simple hysterectomy and even by cervical conization. METHODS: Patients with stage IB1 cervical cancer desiring conservative management underwent simple conization and pelvic lymphadenectomy in three Italian institutes. RESULTS: Thirty-six women received the conservative treatment since 1995 to 2010. Median age was 31 (range 24-40) years and median tumor size was 11.7 mm (range 8-25 mm). Adenocarcinoma was present in 12 cases (33%) and grade 3 neoplasia in 5 (14%). Lymph-vascular space involvement was detected in five patients (14%). Eleven had already a child while two had experienced an early abortion and a fetal loss at second trimester. After a median follow-up of 66 months (range 6-168) only one pelvic lymphnodal relapse was observed. Twenty-one pregnancies occurred in 17 patients and 14 live babies have been born (two preterm at 27 and 32 weeks) while one is ongoing. Three first-trimester miscarriages, one second-trimester fetal loss, an ectopic pregnancy and a termination of pregnancy have been recorded. Five patients decided to undergo hysterectomy after 3-12 years after conservative therapy: in one residual microinvasive adenocarcinoma was found. CONCLUSIONS: Cervical conization represents a feasible conservative management of stage IB1 cervical cancer and shows a low risk of relapse, provided that patients are selected carefully. Conization would be suitable to treat stage IB lesions smaller than 15-20mm. with pathologic negative lymphnodes.
OBJECTIVES: Simple conization represents a plausible treatment scheme for managing stage IA1-2 tumors conservatively. However its curative potential has not been widely exploited as regards stage IB1 lesions. Recent studies suggest that, in selected circumstances, patients with stage IB1 disease undergoing radical hysterectomy could have been safely cured by simple hysterectomy and even by cervical conization. METHODS:Patients with stage IB1 cervical cancer desiring conservative management underwent simple conization and pelvic lymphadenectomy in three Italian institutes. RESULTS: Thirty-six women received the conservative treatment since 1995 to 2010. Median age was 31 (range 24-40) years and median tumor size was 11.7 mm (range 8-25 mm). Adenocarcinoma was present in 12 cases (33%) and grade 3 neoplasia in 5 (14%). Lymph-vascular space involvement was detected in five patients (14%). Eleven had already a child while two had experienced an early abortion and a fetal loss at second trimester. After a median follow-up of 66 months (range 6-168) only one pelvic lymphnodal relapse was observed. Twenty-one pregnancies occurred in 17 patients and 14 live babies have been born (two preterm at 27 and 32 weeks) while one is ongoing. Three first-trimester miscarriages, one second-trimester fetal loss, an ectopic pregnancy and a termination of pregnancy have been recorded. Five patients decided to undergo hysterectomy after 3-12 years after conservative therapy: in one residual microinvasive adenocarcinoma was found. CONCLUSIONS: Cervical conization represents a feasible conservative management of stage IB1 cervical cancer and shows a low risk of relapse, provided that patients are selected carefully. Conization would be suitable to treat stage IB lesions smaller than 15-20mm. with pathologic negative lymphnodes.
Authors: Silvana Pedra Nobre; Varvara Mazina; Alexia Iasonos; Qin C Zhou; Yukio Sonoda; Ginger Gardner; Kara Long-Roche; Mario M Leitao; Nadeem R Abu-Rustum; Jennifer J Mueller Journal: Int J Gynecol Cancer Date: 2020-06-03 Impact factor: 3.437
Authors: Andres A Roma; Toni-Ann Mistretta; Andrea Diaz De Vivar; Kay J Park; Isabel Alvarado-Cabrero; Golnar Rasty; Jose G Chanona-Vilchis; Yoshiki Mikami; Sung R Hong; Norihiro Teramoto; Rouba Ali-Fehmi; Denise Barbuto; Joanne K L Rutgers; Elvio G Silva Journal: Gynecol Oncol Date: 2016-04 Impact factor: 5.482
Authors: Brigitte Gerstl; Elizabeth Sullivan; Marcus Vallejo; Jana Koch; Maximilian Johnson; Handan Wand; Kate Webber; Angela Ives; Antoinette Anazodo Journal: J Cancer Surviv Date: 2019-04-17 Impact factor: 4.442
Authors: Pedro T Ramirez; Rene Pareja; Gabriel J Rendón; Carlos Millan; Michael Frumovitz; Kathleen M Schmeler Journal: Gynecol Oncol Date: 2013-09-14 Impact factor: 5.482
Authors: Francesco Fanfani; Fabio Landoni; Maria Lucia Gagliardi; Anna Fagotti; Eleonora Preti; Maria Cristina Moruzzi; Giorgia Monterossi; Giovanni Scambia Journal: J Reprod Infertil Date: 2014-01