Literature DB >> 28640767

Surgical and Pathological Outcomes of Laparoscopic Versus Abdominal Radical Hysterectomy With Pelvic Lymphadenectomy and/or Para-aortic Lymph Node Sampling for Bulky Early-Stage Cervical Cancer.

Tao Zhu1, Xi Chen, Jianqing Zhu, Yaqing Chen, Aijun Yu, Lu Chen, Huafeng Shou, Meijuan Wu, Ping Zhang.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to compare the feasibility, morbidity, and recurrence rate of total laparoscopic radical hysterectomy (LRH) with those of abdominal radical hysterectomy (ARH) for bulky early-stage cervical cancer.
METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study of 112 patients with stage IB1 or IIA2 cervical cancer in which the tumor diameter was 3 cm or greater. All patients underwent LRH (n = 30) or ARH (n = 82) with pelvic lymphadenectomy and/or para-aortic lymph node sampling between May 2011 and November 2014. Perioperative outcomes were compared between the 2 surgical groups.
RESULTS: The laparoscopic approach consisted of 4 trocar insertions. Age, tumor diameter, and pelvic lymph nodes significantly differed between the 2 cohorts. Body mass index, International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics stage, histologic type and grade, deep stromal invasion, lymphovascular space invasion, positive margins, and adjuvant therapy were not significantly different between the 2 cohorts. Laparoscopic radical hysterectomy exhibited favorable results compared with ARH in terms of operating time, blood loss, intestinal exhaust time, and length of hospital stay. In addition, recurrence was observed in 5 LRH patients (16.7%) and 9 ARH patients (11.7%).
CONCLUSIONS: The surgical outcomes of LRH with pelvic lymphadenectomy and/or para-aortic lymph node sampling exhibited a similar therapeutic efficacy to those of the ARH approach.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28640767     DOI: 10.1097/IGC.0000000000000716

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


  6 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

5.  Analysis of related risk factors of lung metastasis after laparoscopic radical hysterectomy of cervical cancer.

Authors:  Liu Henglian; Wang Jiajun; Wang Caixia; Lu Gang; Xia Min
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2021-05-07       Impact factor: 1.889

6.  Adverse effect of laparoscopic radical hysterectomy depends on tumor size in patients with cervical cancer.

Authors:  Ting Wen Yi Hu; Xiu Ming; Hao Zheng Yan; Zheng Yu Li
Journal:  Cancer Manag Res       Date:  2019-09-09       Impact factor: 3.989

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.