Literature DB >> 24742012

Total laparoscopic versus open radical hysterectomy in stage IA2-IB1 cervical cancer: disease recurrence and survival comparison.

Tayfun Toptas1, Tayup Simsek.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Few reports have examined the impact of laparoscopic approach on survival outcomes in patients with early-stage (IA2-IB1) cervical cancer (CC). In this study we aimed to compare disease recurrence and survival outcomes of total laparoscopic radical hysterectomy (TLRH) with those for open radical hysterectomy (ORH) and pelvic lymphadenectomy in patients with early-stage CC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A single-center, retrospective analysis was conducted in a total of 68 patients who treated with TLRH (n=22) or ORH (n=46) between 2007 and 2010. The primary endpoint of the study was progression-free survival (PFS).
RESULTS: Median follow-up time was 42.50 months (range, 38.40-55.42 months) for the TLRH group and 43.50 months (range, 37.66-52.65) for the ORH group. The study groups were comparable in terms of baseline characteristics except the ORH group had more patients with tumor size greater than 2 cm (P=.026), depth of stromal invasion greater than 33% (P<.0001), and International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics stage IB1 disease (P=.019). However, these factors had no impact on overall and PFS in Cox regression analyses. In total, three recurrences were observed in the TLRH group. Two of the 3 patients were alive with no evidence of disease, and the remaining individual was alive with disease (AWD). In the ORH group, 5 patients had recurrences. Two of the 5 patients died of disease, and three were AWD. The estimated 3-year PFS (86.1% versus 90.6%, respectively; P=.32) and overall survival (100% vs. 95.4%, respectively; P=.82) were comparable in the TLRH and ORH groups.
CONCLUSIONS: TLRH and ORH have similar survival outcomes in patients with early-stage CC.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24742012     DOI: 10.1089/lap.2013.0514

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A        ISSN: 1092-6429            Impact factor:   1.878


  12 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

Review 2.  New Developments in Minimally Invasive Gynecologic Oncology Surgery.

Authors:  Katherine Ikard Stewart; Amanda N Fader
Journal:  Clin Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2017-06       Impact factor: 2.190

3.  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

4.  Impact of hospital care volume on clinical outcomes of laparoscopic radical hysterectomy for cervical cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Banghyun Lee; Kidong Kim; Youngmi Park; Myong Cheol Lim; Robert E Bristow
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2018-12       Impact factor: 1.817

5.  Laparoscopic vs. Open Abdominal Radical Hysterectomy for Cervical Cancer: A Single-Institution, Propensity Score Matching Study in China.

Authors:  Zhen Yuan; Dongyan Cao; Jie Yang; Mei Yu; Keng Shen; Jiaxin Yang; Ying Zhang; Huimei Zhou
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2019-10-30       Impact factor: 6.244

6.  Minimally invasive surgery vs laparotomy for early stage cervical cancer: A propensity score-matched cohort study.

Authors:  Danian Dai; He Huang; Yanling Feng; Ting Wan; Zhimin Liu; Chongjie Tong; Jihong Liu
Journal:  Cancer Med       Date:  2020-11-25       Impact factor: 4.452

7.  Prognostic and Safety Roles in Laparoscopic Versus Abdominal Radical Hysterectomy in Cervical Cancer: A Meta-analysis.

Authors:  Tiefeng Cao; Yanling Feng; Qidan Huang; Ting Wan; Jihong Liu
Journal:  J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A       Date:  2015-11-19       Impact factor: 1.878

8.  Laparoscopy versus laparotomy for the management of early stage cervical cancer.

Authors:  Yan-zhou Wang; Li Deng; Hui-cheng Xu; Yao Zhang; Zhi-qing Liang
Journal:  BMC Cancer       Date:  2015-11-24       Impact factor: 4.430

9.  Risk model in stage IB1-IIB cervical cancer with positive node after radical hysterectomy.

Authors:  Zhilan Chen; Kecheng Huang; Zhiyong Lu; Song Deng; Jiaqiang Xiong; Jia Huang; Xiong Li; Fangxu Tang; Zhihao Wang; Haiying Sun; Lin Wang; Shasha Zhou; Xiaoli Wang; Yao Jia; Ting Hu; Juan Gui; Dongyi Wan; Ding Ma; Shuang Li; Shixuan Wang
Journal:  Onco Targets Ther       Date:  2016-05-27       Impact factor: 4.147

Review 10.  Robotic radical hysterectomy is superior to laparoscopic radical hysterectomy and open radical hysterectomy in the treatment of cervical cancer.

Authors:  Yue-Mei Jin; Shan-Shan Liu; Jun Chen; Yan-Nan Chen; Chen-Chen Ren
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-03-19       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.