OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to compare site and time to recurrence in patients affected by early stage cervical cancer (CC) treated with laparoscopy radical hysterectomy (LRH) versus abdominal radical hysterectomy (ARH). METHODS: This retrospective study was conducted in a university teaching, tertiary referral center hospital. We included patients undergoing either LRH or open ARH to treat CC. RESULTS: One hundred fifty patients were included, 82 submitted to LRH and 68 submitted to ARH. Baseline characteristics of the 2 groups were comparable, except for body mass index higher in ARH group. Patients undergoing LRH experienced less blood loss (100 vs 400 mL, P < 0.0001), less lymph nodes removed (20 vs 31, P = 0.001), and shorter recovery (4 vs 8 days, P = 0.0005) in comparison with the ARH group. No significant differences were found regarding recurrence rate (9 vs 13, P = 0.17) and time to recurrence (8 vs 17 months, P = 0.066) between LRH and ARH group.Sites of recurrence were also comparable between the 2 groups: 2/9 versus 2/13 (P = 1) local recurrence, 4/9 versus 8/13 (P = 0.66) pelvic recurrence, 4/9 versus 7/13 (P = 1) distant recurrence in LRH and ARH groups, respectively. The most frequent sites of recurrence were pelvic and distant (44.4%) in LRH group and pelvic (61.5%) in ARH group. CONCLUSIONS: Our data demonstrate that early stage CC can be treated with LRH with similar recurrence rates and patterns in comparison with ARH, reassuring its continuing clinical use.
OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to compare site and time to recurrence in patients affected by early stage cervical cancer (CC) treated with laparoscopy radical hysterectomy (LRH) versus abdominal radical hysterectomy (ARH). METHODS: This retrospective study was conducted in a university teaching, tertiary referral center hospital. We included patients undergoing either LRH or open ARH to treat CC. RESULTS: One hundred fifty patients were included, 82 submitted to LRH and 68 submitted to ARH. Baseline characteristics of the 2 groups were comparable, except for body mass index higher in ARH group. Patients undergoing LRH experienced less blood loss (100 vs 400 mL, P < 0.0001), less lymph nodes removed (20 vs 31, P = 0.001), and shorter recovery (4 vs 8 days, P = 0.0005) in comparison with the ARH group. No significant differences were found regarding recurrence rate (9 vs 13, P = 0.17) and time to recurrence (8 vs 17 months, P = 0.066) between LRH and ARH group.Sites of recurrence were also comparable between the 2 groups: 2/9 versus 2/13 (P = 1) local recurrence, 4/9 versus 8/13 (P = 0.66) pelvic recurrence, 4/9 versus 7/13 (P = 1) distant recurrence in LRH and ARH groups, respectively. The most frequent sites of recurrence were pelvic and distant (44.4%) in LRH group and pelvic (61.5%) in ARH group. CONCLUSIONS: Our data demonstrate that early stage CC can be treated with LRH with similar recurrence rates and patterns in comparison with ARH, reassuring its continuing clinical use.
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
Authors: Benny Brandt; Vasileios Sioulas; Derman Basaran; Theresa Kuhn; Katherine LaVigne; Ginger J Gardner; Yukio Sonoda; Dennis S Chi; Kara C Long Roche; Jennifer J Mueller; Elizabeth L Jewell; Vance A Broach; Oliver Zivanovic; Nadeem R Abu-Rustum; Mario M Leitao Journal: Gynecol Oncol Date: 2020-01-07 Impact factor: 5.482
Authors: Luigi Pedone Anchora; Luigi Calrlo Turco; Nicolò Bizzarri; Vito Andrea Capozzi; Andrea Lombisani; Vito Chiantera; Francesca De Felice; Valerio Gallotta; Francesco Cosentino; Anna Fagotti; Gabriella Ferrandina; Giovanni Scambia Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2020-01-02 Impact factor: 5.344