Literature DB >> 33504547

Oncological outcomes of laparoscopic radical hysterectomy versus radical abdominal hysterectomy in patients with early-stage cervical cancer: a multicenter analysis.

Juliana Rodriguez1,2, Jose Alejandro Rauh-Hain3, James Saenz1, David Ortiz Isla4, Gabriel Jaime Rendon Pereira5, Diego Odetto6, Fabio Martinelli7, Vladimir Villoslada8, Ignacio Zapardiel9, Lina Maria Trujillo1, Milagros Perez4, Marcela Hernandez5, Jose Martin Saadi6, Francesco Raspagliesi7, Henry Valdivia8, Jaime Siegrist9, Shuangshuang Fu3, Mindy Hernandez Nava4, Lina Echeverry5, Florencia Noll6, Antonino Ditto7, Aldo Lopez8, Alicia Hernandez9, Rene Pareja10,11.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Recent evidence has shown adverse oncological outcomes when minimally invasive surgery is used in early-stage cervical cancer. The objective of this study was to compare disease-free survival in patients that had undergone radical hysterectomy and pelvic lymphadenectomy, either by laparoscopy or laparotomy.
METHODS: We performed a multicenter, retrospective cohort study of patients with cervical cancer stage IA1 with lymph-vascular invasion, IA2, and IB1 (FIGO 2009 classification), between January 1, 2006 to December 31, 2017, at seven cancer centers from six countries. We included squamous, adenocarcinoma, and adenosquamous histologies. We used an inverse probability of treatment weighting based on propensity score to construct a weighted cohort of women, including predictor variables selected a priori with the possibility of confounding the relationship between the surgical approach and survival. We estimated the HR for all-cause mortality after radical hysterectomy with weighted Cox proportional hazard models.
RESULTS: A total of 1379 patients were included in the final analysis, with 681 (49.4%) operated by laparoscopy and 698 (50.6%) by laparotomy. There were no differences regarding the surgical approach in the rates of positive vaginal margins, deep stromal invasion, and lymphovascular space invasion. Median follow-up was 52.1 months (range, 0.8-201.2) in the laparoscopic group and 52.6 months (range, 0.4-166.6) in the laparotomy group. Women who underwent laparoscopic radical hysterectomy had a lower rate of disease-free survival compared with the laparotomy group (4-year rate, 88.7% vs 93.0%; HR for recurrence or death from cervical cancer 1.64; 95% CI 1.09-2.46; P=0.02). In sensitivity analyzes, after adjustment for adjuvant treatment, radical hysterectomy by laparoscopy compared with laparotomy was associated with increased hazards of recurrence or death from cervical cancer (HR 1.7; 95% CI 1.13 to 2.57; P=0.01) and death for any cause (HR 2.14; 95% CI 1.05-4.37; P=0.03).
CONCLUSION: In this retrospective multicenter study, laparoscopy was associated with worse disease-free survival, compared to laparotomy. © IGCS and ESGO 2021. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.

Entities:  

Keywords:  hysterectomy; uterine cervical neoplasms

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 33504547     DOI: 10.1136/ijgc-2020-002086

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


  7 in total

1.  Open Versus Minimally Invasive Radical Hysterectomy in Cervical Cancer: The CIRCOL Group Study.

Authors:  Glauco Baiocchi; Reitan Ribeiro; Ricardo Dos Reis; Deraldo Fernando Falcao; Andre Lopes; Ronaldo Lucio Rangel Costa; Gabriel Lowndes Souza Pinto; Marcelo Vieira; Lillian Yuri Kumagai; Carlos Chaves Faloppa; Henrique Mantoan; Levon Badiglian-Filho; Audrey Tieko Tsunoda; Tariane Friedrich Foiato; Carlos Eduardo Mattos Cunha Andrade; Leonardo Oliveira Palmeira; Bruna Tirapelli Gonçalves; Paulo Henrique Zanvettor
Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol       Date:  2021-09-20       Impact factor: 5.344

2.  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

3.  Comparison of Minimally Invasive Versus Abdominal Radical Hysterectomy for Early-Stage Cervical Cancer: An Updated Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Mengting Zhang; Wei Dai; Yuexiu Si; Yetan Shi; Xiangyuan Li; Ke Jiang; Jingyi Shen; Liying Ying
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2022-01-24       Impact factor: 6.244

Review 4.  Management of Early-Stage Cervical Cancer: A Literature Review.

Authors:  Yasmin Medeiros Guimarães; Luani Rezende Godoy; Adhemar Longatto-Filho; Ricardo Dos Reis
Journal:  Cancers (Basel)       Date:  2022-01-24       Impact factor: 6.639

5.  Trends in Surgical Morbidity and Survival Outcomes for Radical Hysterectomy in West China: An 11-Year Retrospective Cohort Study.

Authors:  Huining Jing; Ying Yang; Yinxia Liu; Peijun Zou; Zhengyu Li
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2022-02-10       Impact factor: 6.244

6.  Prognosis and Efficacy of Laparoscopic Surgery on Patients with Endometrial Carcinoma: Systematic Evaluation and Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Jiong Ma; Chunxia Zhou; Jinyan Chen; Xuejun Chen
Journal:  Comput Math Methods Med       Date:  2022-09-22       Impact factor: 2.809

Review 7.  A meta-analysis of survival after minimally invasive radical hysterectomy versus abdominal radical hysterectomy in cervical cancer: center-associated factors matter.

Authors:  Si Sun; Jing Cai; Ruixie Li; Yujia Wang; Jing Zhao; Yuhui Huang; Linjuan Xu; Qiang Yang; Zehua Wang
Journal:  Arch Gynecol Obstet       Date:  2022-01-21       Impact factor: 2.493

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.