Koji Matsuo1, Ling Chen2, Rachel S Mandelbaum3, Alexander Melamed2, Lynda D Roman1, Jason D Wright4. 1. Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA; Norris Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA. 2. Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Columbia University College of Physicians and Surgeons, New York, NY. 3. Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA. 4. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA. Electronic address: jw2459@columbia.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: A recent trial demonstrated decreased survival in women with early-stage cervical cancer who underwent radical hysterectomy via minimally invasive surgery compared with laparotomy; however, outcomes following trachelectomy have yet to be studied. OBJECTIVE: To examine trends, characteristics, and survival of reproductive-aged women with early-stage cervical cancer who underwent minimally invasive trachelectomy. STUDY DESIGN: This is a retrospective study examining the National Cancer Database between 2010 and 2015. Women aged <50 years who underwent trachelectomy for stage IA2-IB cervical cancer were grouped by mode of surgery. Clinicopathologic characteristics and outcomes were compared between minimally invasive surgery and laparotomy groups. RESULTS: A total of 246 women were included, 144 (58.5%, 95% confidence interval, 52.4%-64.7%) of whom had trachelectomy with a minimally invasive surgery approach. Median age was similar between the minimally invasive surgery and laparotomy groups (median, 31 vs 29 years, P = .20). There was a significant increase in the use of minimally invasive surgery from 29.3% in 2010 to 75.0% in 2015 (P < .001). Specifically, minimally invasive surgery became the dominant approach for trachelectomy by year 2011 (54.8%). Hospitals registered in the West (75.0% vs 25.0%) were more likely, whereas those registered in the Midwest (46.9% vs 53.1%) were less likely, to perform minimally invasive surgery (P = .02). Median follow-up was 37 months (interquartile range, 23-51) for the minimally invasive surgery group and 40 months (interquartile range, 26-67) for the laparotomy group. During follow-up, there were 11 (5.3%) deaths, 4 (3.5%) in the minimally invasive surgery group and 7 (7.6%) in the laparotomy group (P = .25). CONCLUSION: Minimally invasive surgery has become the dominant modality for trachelectomy in reproductive-aged women with stage IA2-IB cervical cancer after year 2011. Survival of women with stage IA2-IB cervical cancer who underwent trachelectomy is generally good regardless of surgical modality. Although our study showed no difference in survival between the minimally invasive surgery and laparotomy approaches, effects of MIS on survival remain unknown and further study is warranted.
BACKGROUND: A recent trial demonstrated decreased survival in women with early-stage cervical cancer who underwent radical hysterectomy via minimally invasive surgery compared with laparotomy; however, outcomes following trachelectomy have yet to be studied. OBJECTIVE: To examine trends, characteristics, and survival of reproductive-aged women with early-stage cervical cancer who underwent minimally invasive trachelectomy. STUDY DESIGN: This is a retrospective study examining the National Cancer Database between 2010 and 2015. Women aged <50 years who underwent trachelectomy for stage IA2-IB cervical cancer were grouped by mode of surgery. Clinicopathologic characteristics and outcomes were compared between minimally invasive surgery and laparotomy groups. RESULTS: A total of 246 women were included, 144 (58.5%, 95% confidence interval, 52.4%-64.7%) of whom had trachelectomy with a minimally invasive surgery approach. Median age was similar between the minimally invasive surgery and laparotomy groups (median, 31 vs 29 years, P = .20). There was a significant increase in the use of minimally invasive surgery from 29.3% in 2010 to 75.0% in 2015 (P < .001). Specifically, minimally invasive surgery became the dominant approach for trachelectomy by year 2011 (54.8%). Hospitals registered in the West (75.0% vs 25.0%) were more likely, whereas those registered in the Midwest (46.9% vs 53.1%) were less likely, to perform minimally invasive surgery (P = .02). Median follow-up was 37 months (interquartile range, 23-51) for the minimally invasive surgery group and 40 months (interquartile range, 26-67) for the laparotomy group. During follow-up, there were 11 (5.3%) deaths, 4 (3.5%) in the minimally invasive surgery group and 7 (7.6%) in the laparotomy group (P = .25). CONCLUSION: Minimally invasive surgery has become the dominant modality for trachelectomy in reproductive-aged women with stage IA2-IB cervical cancer after year 2011. Survival of women with stage IA2-IB cervical cancer who underwent trachelectomy is generally good regardless of surgical modality. Although our study showed no difference in survival between the minimally invasive surgery and laparotomy approaches, effects of MIS on survival remain unknown and further study is warranted.
Authors: Koji Matsuo; Shinya Matsuzaki; Rachel S Mandelbaum; Kazuhide Matsushima; Maximilian Klar; Brendan H Grubbs; Lynda D Roman; Jason D Wright Journal: Gynecol Oncol Date: 2020-01-22 Impact factor: 5.482
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: Gloria Salvo; Pedro T Ramirez; Mario M Leitao; David Cibula; Xiaohua Wu; Henrik Falconer; Jan Persson; Myriam Perrotta; Berit J Mosgaard; Ali Kucukmetin; Igor Berlev; Gabriel Rendon; Kaijiang Liu; Marcelo Vieira; Mihai E Capilna; Christina Fotopoulou; Glauco Baiocchi; Dilyara Kaidarova; Reitan Ribeiro; Silvana Pedra-Nobre; Roman Kocian; Xiaoqi Li; Jin Li; Kolbrún Pálsdóttir; Florencia Noll; Stuart Rundle; Elena Ulrikh; Zhijun Hu; Mihai Gheorghe; Srdjan Saso; Raikhan Bolatbekova; Audrey Tsunoda; Brandelyn Pitcher; Jimin Wu; Diana Urbauer; Rene Pareja Journal: Am J Obstet Gynecol Date: 2021-08-27 Impact factor: 10.693
Authors: Evan S Smith; Ashley S Moon; Robin O'Hanlon; Mario M Leitao; Yukio Sonoda; Nadeem R Abu-Rustum; Jennifer J Mueller Journal: Obstet Gynecol Date: 2020-09 Impact factor: 7.623