Literature DB >> 27643649

Long-Term Oncological Outcomes After Laparoscopic Versus Abdominal Radical Hysterectomy in Stage IA2 to IIA2 Cervical Cancer: A Matched Cohort Study.

Wei Wang1, Hong Juan Chu, Chun Liang Shang, Xiao Gong, Tian Yu Liu, Yun He Zhao, Jia Ming Huang, Shu-Zhong Yao.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to investigate the long-term oncological outcomes of laparoscopic radical hysterectomy (LRH) and abdominal radical hysterectomy (ARH) for treatment of stage IA2 to IIA2 cervical cancer.
METHODS: We matched stage IA2 to IIA2 cervical cancer patients with known risk factors for recurrence who underwent ARH or LRH.
RESULTS: After matching, a total of 203 patient pairs (LRH-ARH) were included. The LRH and ARH group had similar 5-year recurrence-free survival (RFS) rates (91.3% vs 90.4%, P = 0.83) and overall survival (OS) rates (93.2% vs 92.1%, P = 0.94). Patients with different tumor size (≤2, 2-4, >4 cm) had similar 5-year OS and RFS. Even in patients with pelvic lymph node metastasis, the 5-year RFS (69.20% vs 69.20%, P = 0.87) and OS (77.4% vs 76.3%, P = 0.83) did not differ statistically between the 2 groups. The LRH and ARH group had similar mean time to recurrence (16.29 vs 22.15 months, P = 0.68) and pattern of recurrence (P = 0.63). Compared with ARH, LRH resulted in significantly shorter operating time, less blood loss, and shorter hospital stay. The intraoperative complications rate was similar between the 2 groups (P = 0.72). The rate of postoperative complications was significantly lower in the LRH group than in the ARH group (P = 0.004).
CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic radical hysterectomy was associated with fewer operating time, blood loss, postoperative complication, and earlier recovery. Laparoscopic radical hysterectomy is an oncologically safe alternative to ARH.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27643649     DOI: 10.1097/IGC.0000000000000749

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Gynecol Cancer        ISSN: 1048-891X            Impact factor:   3.437


  16 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

2.  Laparoscopic radical hysterectomy has higher risk of perioperative urologic complication than abdominal radical hysterectomy: a meta-analysis of 38 studies.

Authors:  Jong Ha Hwang; Bo Wook Kim
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2020-01-17       Impact factor: 4.584

3.  Minimally invasive surgery versus laparotomy for radical hysterectomy in the management of early-stage cervical cancer: Survival outcomes.

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

Review 4.  Radical Hysterectomy for Cervical Cancer: the Right Surgical Approach.

Authors:  Benny Brandt; Gabriel Levin; Mario M Leitao
Journal:  Curr Treat Options Oncol       Date:  2022-02-15

Review 5.  The incidence of postoperative symptomatic lymphocele after pelvic lymphadenectomy between abdominal and laparoscopic approach: a systemic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Jong Ha Hwang; Bo Wook Kim
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2022-04-25       Impact factor: 3.453

6.  Survival after Laparoscopic versus Abdominal Radical Hysterectomy in Early Cervical Cancer: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

Authors:  Luciana Silveira Campos; Leo Francisco Limberger; Airton Teltebom Stein; Jose Manuel Caldas
Journal:  Asian Pac J Cancer Prev       Date:  2021-01-01

7.  Retrospective Comparison of Laparoscopic versus Open Radical Hysterectomy for Early-Stage Cervical Cancer in a Single Tertiary Care Institution from Lithuania between 2009 and 2019.

Authors:  Danuta Vasilevska; Dominika Vasilevska; Andrzej Semczuk; Vilius Rudaitis
Journal:  Medicina (Kaunas)       Date:  2022-04-17       Impact factor: 2.430

8.  MicroRNA-221-3p, a TWIST2 target, promotes cervical cancer metastasis by directly targeting THBS2.

Authors:  Wen-Fei Wei; Chen-Fei Zhou; Xiang-Guang Wu; Li-Na He; Lan-Fang Wu; Xiao-Jing Chen; Rui-Ming Yan; Mei Zhong; Yan-Hong Yu; Li Liang; Wei Wang
Journal:  Cell Death Dis       Date:  2017-12-14       Impact factor: 8.469

Review 9.  Unexpected result of minimally invasive surgery for cervical cancer.

Authors:  Hiroyuki Kanao; Yoichi Aoki; Nobuhiro Takeshima
Journal:  J Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2018-05-15       Impact factor: 4.401

10.  Comparative Effectiveness of Abdominal versus Laparoscopic Radical Hysterectomy for Cervical Cancer in the Postdissemination Era.

Authors:  Jin Hee Kim; Kyungjoo Kim; Seo Jin Park; Jung-Yun Lee; Kidong Kim; Myong Cheol Lim; Jae Weon Kim
Journal:  Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2018-09-11       Impact factor: 4.679

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.