| Literature DB >> 29081801 |
M Toure1, A T Bambara2, K K Y Kouassi1, E N Seka1, J M Dia3, I Yao3, O Kimso1, I Adoubi1.
Abstract
Concomitant radiochemotherapy is the therapeutic standard for locally advanced (Ib2 to IVa stage FIGO) cervical cancer. In the absence of a radiotherapy in many of our Sub-Saharan African countries, surgical resection is the only therapeutic method available in hopes of achieving a definite cure. However, criteria for curative surgery are not always met due to preoperative understaging of most of our patients. In addition to socioeconomic factors, the causes for understaging are numerous. These include the lack of personnel or underqualified personnel and the absence of complete workup to assess the resectability of the tumor, but above all the lack of decision-making through multidisciplinary consultation meetings. This study makes a plea in order to provide our hospitals with qualified personnel and adequate technical platform to allow efficient management of our patients with cervical cancer.Entities:
Year: 2017 PMID: 29081801 PMCID: PMC5610798 DOI: 10.1155/2017/8201462
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Oncol ISSN: 1687-8450 Impact factor: 4.375
| Kappa coefficient | Level of concordance |
|---|---|
| >0,81 | Very good |
| 0,80–0,61 | Good |
| 0,60–0,41 | Moderate |
| 0,40–0,21 | Mediocre |
| 0,20–0,00 | Poor |
| <0,001 | Very poor |
Patients and examination conditions characteristics.
| Parameters | Number | Percentage (%) |
|---|---|---|
|
| ||
| (i) Yes | 32 | 41,03 |
| (ii) No | 46 | 58,97 |
|
| ||
| (i) Pain | 51 | 65,38 |
| (ii) Metrorrhagia | 50 | 64,10 |
| (iii) Leucorrhea | 42 | 53,85 |
| (iv) Screening | 60 | 76,92 |
|
| ||
| (i) 1 | 50 | 64,10 |
| (ii) 2 | 28 | 36,90 |
|
| ||
| (i) 1 | 21 | 26,92 |
| (ii) 2 | 31 | 39,74 |
| (iii) 3 | 26 | 33,33 |
|
| ||
| (i) Specialist | 45 | 42,31 |
| (ii) Generalist | 33 | 57,69 |
|
| ||
| (i) Yes | 40 | 51,28 |
| (ii) No | 38 | 48,72 |
|
| ||
| (i) Yes | 60 | 76,92 |
| (ii) No | 10 | 23,08 |
|
| ||
| (i) Yes | 59 | 75,64 |
| (ii) No | 19 | 24,36 |
|
| ||
| (i) Yes | 38 | 48,72 |
| (ii) No | 40 | 51,28 |
|
| ||
| (i) Yes | 19 | 24,36 |
| (ii) No | 59 | 75,64 |
Clinical staging versus intraoperative staging.
| Preoperative staging | Intraoperative staging | Level of underestimation | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| IA | IB | IIA | IIB | IIIA | IIIB | IVA | ||
| IA |
| 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0,0% |
| IB | 0 |
| 4 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 41,2% |
| IIA | 0 | 0 |
| 5 | 4 | 12 | 3 | 70,6% |
| IIB | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| 2 | 7 | 8 | 85,0% |
| IIIA | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| 0 | 1 | 100% |
| IIIB | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| 2 | 66,6% |
| IVA | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
|
|
Table of concordance between intraoperative staging and postoperative staging.
| Intraoperative staging | Postoperative staging | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ia | Ib1 | Ib2 | IIa | IIb | IIIa | IIIb | IVa | IVb | IV | |
| Ia |
| 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Ib1 | 0 |
| 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Ib2 | 0 | 0 |
| 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| IIa | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
| IIb | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| IIIa | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| IIIb | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| 0 | 0 | 1 |
| IVa | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| 0 | 9 |
| IVb | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| 0 |
∗ refers to the pathology classifications (pT4) without any “a” or “b” specifications.
Factors related to the clinical versus intraoperative staging discrepancies (logistic regression).
| Univariate analysis | Multivariate analysis | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RC | IC 95% |
| RC | IC 95% |
| |
| Pain | ||||||
| No | 1 | 1 | ||||
| Yes | 12,57 | [4,1–38,9] | < | 4,1 | 0,6–26,6 | NS |
| Metrorrhagia | ||||||
| No | 1 | 1 | ||||
| Yes | 11,06 | [3,6–33,6] | < | 1,1 | 0,09–13,1 | NS |
| Screening | ||||||
| No | 1 | 1 | ||||
| Yes | 45,3 | [8,9–231,8] | 30,5 | [4,5–207,2] |
| |
| Number of examiners | ||||||
| 1 | 1 | 1 | ||||
| 2 | 0,2 | [0,02–1,9] | 0,16 | 0,19 | 0,02–2,4 | NS |
| 3 | 0,02 | [0,002–0,2] | < | 0,14 | 0,007–2,9 | NS |
| Type of examiner | ||||||
| Specialist | 1 | 1 | ||||
| Generalist | 9,6 | [2,5–35,9] | 1,4 | 0,2–11,8 | NS | |
| Examination under narcosis | ||||||
| No | 14,3 | [3,8–54,1] |
| 6,5 | [1,3–31,7] |
|
| Yes | 1 | 1 | ||||
| Obesity | ||||||
| No | 1 | 1 | ||||
| Yes | 25,9 | [2,4–33,2] |
| 6,9 | [1,2–40,9] |
|
| CT scan | ||||||
| No | 6,6 | [2,1–20,4] |
| 0,3 | 0,05–1,5 | NS |
| Yes | 1 | 1 | ||||
Figure 1Overall survival: preoperative staging versus intraoperative staging (p ≤ 0.001).
Figure 2Overall survival: intraoperative staging versus postoperative staging (p = 0.0021).