PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This paper reviews the recent literature data on minimally invasive surgical approach to early cervical cancer compared to abdominal approach, with the aim of evaluate the oncological outcomes and the appropriateness of current indications. RECENT FINDINGS: A recent multicenter randomized controlled trial and a concurrent large epidemiological study, contrary to the previous retrospective data, showed that minimally invasive surgery is associated with significantly poorer survival than the open approach. Open surgery is to be considered the standard of care for early cervical cancer as implemented in the current guidelines, and the patients must be carefully counseled if minimally invasive surgery is offered. Minimally invasive surgery can be considered safe only for sentinel lymph node mapping in a fertility-sparing setting and could be considered after preoperative conization and for small tumors, adopting preventive surgical maneuvers and in reference centers. However, prospective evidences about the suggested indications are not yet available.
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This paper reviews the recent literature data on minimally invasive surgical approach to early cervical cancer compared to abdominal approach, with the aim of evaluate the oncological outcomes and the appropriateness of current indications. RECENT FINDINGS: A recent multicenter randomized controlled trial and a concurrent large epidemiological study, contrary to the previous retrospective data, showed that minimally invasive surgery is associated with significantly poorer survival than the open approach. Open surgery is to be considered the standard of care for early cervical cancer as implemented in the current guidelines, and the patients must be carefully counseled if minimally invasive surgery is offered. Minimally invasive surgery can be considered safe only for sentinel lymph node mapping in a fertility-sparing setting and could be considered after preoperative conization and for small tumors, adopting preventive surgical maneuvers and in reference centers. However, prospective evidences about the suggested indications are not yet available.
Authors: Alberto A Mendivil; Mark A Rettenmaier; Lisa N Abaid; John V Brown; John P Micha; Katrina L Lopez; Bram H Goldstein Journal: Surg Oncol Date: 2015-09-14 Impact factor: 3.279
Authors: Christhardt Kohler; Hermann Hertel; Jörg Herrmann; Simone Marnitz; Peter Mallmann; Giovanni Favero; Andrea Plaikner; Peter Martus; Mieczyslaw Gajda; Achim Schneider Journal: Int J Gynecol Cancer Date: 2019-06 Impact factor: 3.437
Authors: Chirag A Shah; Tiffany Beck; John B Liao; Nadia V Giannakopoulos; Dan Veljovich; Pam Paley Journal: J Gynecol Oncol Date: 2017-11 Impact factor: 4.401