Twelve-year experience with laparoscopic radical hysterectomy and pelvic lymphadenectomy in cervical cancer

Effect of modified no-touch laparoscopic radical hysterectomy on outcomes of early stage cervical cancer: A retrospective cohort study

Objectives

We aimed to compare the prognosis of modified no‐touch laparoscopic radical hysterectomy (MLRH) and laparoscopic radical hysterectomy (LRH) on survival in patients with early stage cervical cancer.

Materials and Methods

The clinicopathological data of patients with stage IB1 and IIA1 cervical cancer, who underwent radical surgery between 2014 and 2019, were retrospectively reviewed. The 5‐year disease‐free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) were compared between the MLRH and LRH groups using the Kaplan–Meier method. Independent prognostic factors for 5‐year DFS and OS were identified using multivariate, forward, stepwise Cox proportional hazards regression models.

Results

A total of 223 patients with stage IB1 and IIA1 cervical cancer were included. Kaplan–Meier analysis revealed that the 5‐year DFS and OS rates in the MLRH (n = 81) group were significantly higher than those in the LRH group (n = 142) (DFS, 94.5% vs. 78.8%, p = 0.007; OS, 96.7% vs. 87.6%, p = 0.033). No significant differences were identified between the two groups in terms of operative time, blood loss, transfusion requirement, and intraoperative or postoperative complications. MLRH was an independent prognostic factor associated with increased 5‐year DFS (adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 0.202; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.069–0.594; p = 0.004) and 5‐year OS (adjusted HR, 0.163; 95% CI, 0.035–0.748; p = 0.020).

Conclusion

The oncologic outcomes were superior with MLRH than with LRH in patients with stage IB1 and IIA1 cervical cancer. Contact of cervical tumor cells with the pelvic cavity likely explains the worse prognosis associated with LRH.

Survival after Laparoscopic versus Abdominal Radical Hysterectomy in Early Cervical Cancer: A Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Previous studies have reported the safety of laparoscopic radical hysterectomy for treatment of early cervical cancer, as option to laparotomy. This study aims to compare overall survival between laparoscopic versus abdominal radical hysterectomy for early cervical cancer.

METHODS

A single-center randomized controlled trial enrolled 30 patients with clinically staged IA2 cervical cancer and lymphovascular invasion, IB and IIA, who underwent laparoscopic radical hysterectomy (16) or abdominal radical hysterectomy (14).

RESULT

The mean overall survival time was 74.74 months (CI 95%: 54.15-95.33) for LRH 91.67 months (CI 95%: 74.97-108.37) for ARH (log-rank test = 0.30). The mean disease-free survival time was 81.07 months (CI 95%: 60.95-101.19) for LRH and 95.82 months (CI 95%: 80.18-111.47) for ARH (log-rank test = 0.371). The overall survival hazard ratio was 2.05 (CI 95%: 0.51-8.24), and the disease-free hazard ratio was 2.13 (CI 95%: 0.39-11.7).

CONCLUSION

Our study suggests a non-significant trend of worse outcomes for LRH. In light of recent controversy and need for prospective studies, further studies in different populations are required for definite conclusions and until then, patients should be aware of risks and benefits, survival data and quality of life outcomes related to both surgical techniques.

Feasibility and outcome of total laparoscopic radical hysterectomy with no-look no-touch technique for FIGO IB1 cervical cancer

Objectives

Intraoperative tumor manipulation and dissemination may possibly compromise survival of women with early-stage cervical cancer who undergo minimally-invasive radical hysterectomy (RH). The objective of the study was to examine survival related to minimally-invasive RH with a “no-look no-touch” technique for clinical stage IB1 cervical cancer.

Methods

This retrospective study compared patients who underwent total laparoscopic radical hysterectomy (TLRH) with no-look no-touch technique (n=80) to those who underwent an abdominal radical hysterectomy (ARH; n=83) for stage IB1 (≤4 cm) cervical cancer. TLRH with no-look no-touch technique incorporates 4 specific measures to prevent tumor spillage: 1) creation of a vaginal cuff, 2) avoidance of a uterine manipulator, 3) minimal handling of the uterine cervix, and 4) bagging of the specimen.

Results

Surgical outcomes of TLRH were significantly superior to ARH for operative time (294 vs. 376 minutes), estimated blood loss (185 vs. 500 mL), and length of hospital stay (14 vs. 18 days) (all, p<0.001). Oncologic outcomes were similar between the 2 groups, including disease-free survival (DFS) (p=0.591) and overall survival (p=0.188). When stratified by tumor size (<2 vs. ≥2 cm), DFS was similar between the 2 groups (p=0.897 and p=0.602, respectively). The loco-regional recurrence rate following TLRH was similar to the rate after ARH (6.3% vs. 9.6%, p=0.566). Multiple-pelvic recurrence was observed in only 1 patient in the TLRH group.

Conclusion

Our study suggests that the no-look no-touch technique may be a useful surgical procedure to reduce recurrence risk via preventing intraoperative tumor spillage during TLRH for early-stage cervical cancer.

Morbidity after surgical management of cervical cancer in low and middle income countries: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To investigate morbidity for patients after the primary surgical management of cervical cancer in low and middle-income countries (LMIC).

METHODS

The Pubmed, Cochrane, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Embase, LILACS and CINAHL were searched for published studies from 1st Jan 2000 to 30th June 2017 reporting outcomes of surgical management of cervical cancer in LMIC. Random-effects meta-analytical models were used to calculate pooled estimates of surgical complications including blood transfusions, ureteric, bladder, bowel, vascular and nerve injury, fistulae and thromboembolic events. Secondary outcomes included five-year progression free (PFS) and overall survival (OS).

FINDINGS

Data were available for 46 studies, including 10,847 patients from 11 middle income countries. Pooled estimates were: blood transfusion 29% (95%CI 0.19-0.41, P = 0.00, I2 = 97.81), nerve injury 1% (95%CI 0.00-0.03, I2 77.80, P = 0.00), bowel injury, 0.5% (95%CI 0.01-0.01, I2 = 0.00, P = 0.77), bladder injury 1% (95%CI 0.01-0.02, P = 0.10, I2 = 32.2), ureteric injury 1% (95%CI 0.01-0.01, I2 0.00, P = 0.64), vascular injury 2% (95% CI 0.01-0.03, I2 60.22, P = 0.00), fistula 2% (95%CI 0.01-0.03, I2 = 77.32, P = 0.00,), pulmonary embolism 0.4% (95%CI 0.00-0.01, I2 26.69, P = 0.25), and infection 8% (95%CI 0.04-0.12, I2 95.72, P = 0.00). 5-year PFS was 83% for laparotomy, 84% for laparoscopy and OS was 85% for laparotomy cases and 80% for laparoscopy.

CONCLUSION

This is the first systematic review and meta-analysis of surgical morbidity in cervical cancer in LMIC, which highlights the limitations of the current data and provides a benchmark for future health services research and policy implementation.

Surgical and Oncological Outcome of Total Laparoscopic Radical Hysterectomy versus Radical Abdominal Hysterectomy in Early Cervical Cancer in Singapore

Introduction:

The Wertheim's radical abdominal hysterectomy (RAH) has been the traditional surgical approach for operable Stage IB cervical cancer in Singapore whereas total laparoscopic radical hysterectomy (TLRH) was introduced only in 2009. In this study, we aimed to compare the long-term surgical outcome between the two routes of surgery in our center.

Methods:

This is a prospective study performed in a single large tertiary institution in Singapore. Inclusion criteria included surgically fit patients with early cervical cancer and no radiological evidence of regional or distant metastases.

Results:

From November 2009 to December 2014, 51 TLRHs and 85 RAHs were performed. Median blood loss in the TLRH group was significantly lower than in the RAH group (300 vs. 500 mL; P = 0.002) as was median hospital stay (5 vs. 6 days; P = 0.001). Operative time was significantly higher in the TLRH group (262 vs. 228 min; P < 0.001). There was no significant difference in bladder recovery. Intraoperative complications were encountered in 2 (3.9%) TLRH patients and 1 (1.2%) RAH patient. Postoperative complications occurred in 3 (5.9%) TLRH patients and 8 (9.4%) RAH patients. With a median follow-up of 117 (range 1.6–314.6) weeks in the TLRH group and 143.3 (range 0.4–304.7) weeks in the RAH group, 9 (17.6%) TLRH patients and 7 (8.2%) RAH patients had recurrence. There was no significant difference in the overall 3-year survival between the TLRH group and the RAH group for tumor size ≤2 cm (100.0% vs. 97.0%; P = 0.37). However, there was a trend toward lower survival for the TLRH group for tumor size >2 cm (61.9% vs. 85.4%; P = 0.06).

Conclusion:

The results of our study suggest that with appropriate patient selection, TLRH can be a safe and effective procedure for the management of early cervical cancer in Singapore, especially in women with small tumors ≤2 cm but should be used with caution in women with larger tumors.

Long-Term Oncological Outcomes After Laparoscopic Versus Abdominal Radical Hysterectomy in Stage IA2 to IIA2 Cervical Cancer: A Matched Cohort Study

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the study was to investigate the long-term oncological outcomes of laparoscopic radical hysterectomy (LRH) and abdominal radical hysterectomy (ARH) for treatment of stage IA2 to IIA2 cervical cancer.

METHODS

We matched stage IA2 to IIA2 cervical cancer patients with known risk factors for recurrence who underwent ARH or LRH.

RESULTS

After matching, a total of 203 patient pairs (LRH-ARH) were included. The LRH and ARH group had similar 5-year recurrence-free survival (RFS) rates (91.3% vs 90.4%, P = 0.83) and overall survival (OS) rates (93.2% vs 92.1%, P = 0.94). Patients with different tumor size (≤2, 2-4, >4 cm) had similar 5-year OS and RFS. Even in patients with pelvic lymph node metastasis, the 5-year RFS (69.20% vs 69.20%, P = 0.87) and OS (77.4% vs 76.3%, P = 0.83) did not differ statistically between the 2 groups. The LRH and ARH group had similar mean time to recurrence (16.29 vs 22.15 months, P = 0.68) and pattern of recurrence (P = 0.63). Compared with ARH, LRH resulted in significantly shorter operating time, less blood loss, and shorter hospital stay. The intraoperative complications rate was similar between the 2 groups (P = 0.72). The rate of postoperative complications was significantly lower in the LRH group than in the ARH group (P = 0.004).

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic radical hysterectomy was associated with fewer operating time, blood loss, postoperative complication, and earlier recovery. Laparoscopic radical hysterectomy is an oncologically safe alternative to ARH.

Recurrence of Early Stage Cervical Cancer After Laparoscopic Versus Open Radical Surgery

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the study was to compare site and time to recurrence in patients affected by early stage cervical cancer (CC) treated with laparoscopy radical hysterectomy (LRH) versus abdominal radical hysterectomy (ARH).

METHODS

This retrospective study was conducted in a university teaching, tertiary referral center hospital. We included patients undergoing either LRH or open ARH to treat CC.

RESULTS

One hundred fifty patients were included, 82 submitted to LRH and 68 submitted to ARH. Baseline characteristics of the 2 groups were comparable, except for body mass index higher in ARH group. Patients undergoing LRH experienced less blood loss (100 vs 400 mL, P < 0.0001), less lymph nodes removed (20 vs 31, P = 0.001), and shorter recovery (4 vs 8 days, P = 0.0005) in comparison with the ARH group. No significant differences were found regarding recurrence rate (9 vs 13, P = 0.17) and time to recurrence (8 vs 17 months, P = 0.066) between LRH and ARH group.Sites of recurrence were also comparable between the 2 groups: 2/9 versus 2/13 (P = 1) local recurrence, 4/9 versus 8/13 (P = 0.66) pelvic recurrence, 4/9 versus 7/13 (P = 1) distant recurrence in LRH and ARH groups, respectively. The most frequent sites of recurrence were pelvic and distant (44.4%) in LRH group and pelvic (61.5%) in ARH group.

CONCLUSIONS

Our data demonstrate that early stage CC can be treated with LRH with similar recurrence rates and patterns in comparison with ARH, reassuring its continuing clinical use.

[Initial experience in the laparoscopic treatment of benign and malignant gynaecological diseases in the Hospital Regional de Alta Especialidad in Oaxaca]

BACKGROUND

The history of laparoscopic surgery in gynaecological diseases progressed with the advances of Semm, as well as with the development of tools, equipment, and energy that led to its development in all surgical areas, including oncology.

OBJECTIVE

To present the initial experience in the laparoscopic treatment of benign and malignant gynaecological disease in the Hospital Regional de Alta Especialidad in Oaxaca.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

An analysis was performed on a total of 44 cases, distributed into: type III radical hysterectomy for invasive cervical cancer, hysterectomy type I cervical cancer in situ, extrafascial hysterectomy for benign disease, routine endometrium, ovary and routine salpingo-oophorectomy. The variables included age, BMI, surgical time, bleeding, intraoperative and postoperative complications, conversion, hospital stay, and pathology report.

RESULTS

Hysterectomy type III; age 40.2 years, BMI 25.8kg/m², 238ml bleeding, operative time 228min, 2.6-day hospital stay, intraoperative or postoperative complications, tumour size 1.1cm, 14 lymph nodes dissected, vaginal and negative parametrical edge. Type I hysterectomy cervical cancer in situ: 51 years, BMI 23.8kg/m², 80ml bleeding, operative time 127minutes, uterus of 9cm, length of stay of 2 days, a conversion by external iliac artery injury, with bleeding of 1500ml. Routine endometrium: 50.3 years, BMI 30.3kg/m², 83ml bleeding, operative time 180minutes, uterus 12.6cm, length of stay 2.3 days, no complications.

CONCLUSION

The management of benign and malignant pelvic diseases using laparoscopy is feasible and safe, with shorter hospital stays and a prompt recovery to daily activities.

Urinary and anal dysfunction after laparoscopic versus laparotomic radical hysterectomy

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to compare urinary and anal dysfunction after laparoscopic (LRH) and abdominal (ARH) radical hysterectomy for cervical cancer.

STUDY DESIGN

Consecutive patients who underwent radical hysterectomy for treatment of cervical cancer were enrolled in this study and divided into two groups, according to the surgical approach. Urinary and anal symptoms were evaluated before and 6 months after surgery.

RESULTS

Fifty-four women were considered: 27 LRH and 27 ARH. Urinary incontinence was significantly more frequent both after LRH (37% vs 86.9%, p=0.0004) and after ARH (33.3% vs 100%, p<0.0001); urge incontinence (3.7% vs 29.6%, p=0.02) and increased bladder sensation (0 vs 22.2%, p=0.02) were significantly more common postoperatively in patients undergone ARH. In both groups more patients complain about increase of straining during voiding (LRH: 0 vs 34.7%, p=0.009; ARH: 3.7% vs 29.6% p=0.02) after surgery. Postoperative constipation by obstructed defecation was more frequent after ARH (Wexner score: 0 vs 2, p=0.03) but not after LRH.

CONCLUSION

From our results, laparoscopic approach for radical hysterectomy seems to reduce the postoperative occurrence of urge incontinence, increased bladder sensation and constipation by obstructed defecation, in comparison with abdominal radical surgery.

Total Laparoscopic Versus Laparotomic Radical Hysterectomy and Lymphadenectomy in Cervical Cancer: An Observational Study of 13-Year Experience

This article aims to review our 13-year experience in the treatment of patients with cervical cancer by comparing total laparoscopic radical hysterectomy and lymphadenectomy with laparotomy.We reviewed all patients undergoing total laparoscopic or laparotomic radical hysterectomy and lymphadenectomy because of cervical cancer between 2001 and 2014 in our hospital.In total, 154 eligible patients with International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics Ia-IIb were enrolled, including 106 patients undergoing total laparoscopic procedure and 48 patients undergoing laparotomic procedure. In the present study, patients in total laparoscopy group were associated with superior surgical outcomes, such as significantly lower blood transfusion compared to those in laparotomy group. Furthermore, patients had significantly lower postoperative complication rate in total laparoscopy group compared with that in laparotomy group (24.5% vs 52.1%) (P = 0.001). Three patients (2.8%) in total laparoscopy group had unplanned conversion to laparotomy. Disease-free survival rates were 89.7% and 88.9% in total laparoscopy and laparotomy groups (P = 0.39), respectively, and overall survival rates were 90.2% in total laparoscopy group and 91.3% in laparotomy group (P = 0.40).Total laparoscopic procedure is a surgically and oncologically safe and reliable alternative to laparotomic procedure in the treatment for cervical cancer.

Minimally Invasive Surgical Management of Early-Stage Cervical Cancer: An Analysis of the Risk Factors of Surgical Complications and of Oncologic Outcomes

Objectives

The objective of this study was to evaluate the morbidity and the oncologic outcomes of laparoscopic radical hysterectomy in treating early-stage cervical cancer.

Methods

We included all patients with early-stage cervical cancer (IA, IB1, IIA1, and IIB), as assessed by the Federation International of Gynecology and Obstetrics staging criteria, undergoing laparoscopic radical hysterectomy from January 1999 to December 2013 in our center. Morbidity was classified according to the Clavien and Dindo classification.

Results

A total of 170 patients were included in which 7 patients were in stage IA2, 150 in IB1, 2 in IIA, and 7 in IIB. The mean operation time was 256 minutes (67–495 minutes). Fourteen severe perioperative complications (8.2%) occurred, in which 5 patients (2.9%) required conversion to an open procedure: 3 bowel injuries, 3 hemorrhages, 2 ureteral injuries, 3 bladder injuries, 2 severe adhesions, and 1 intolerance to the Trendelenburg position. Fourteen patients (8.2%) presented with 1 severe postoperative complication (grade III or more). Two factors appeared as independent risk factors for perioperative and/or postoperative complications: the tumor size (odds ratio, 1.128; 95% confidence interval, 1.054–1.207) and operative time (odds ratio, 1.0116; 95% confidence interval, 1.003–1.020). In a median follow-up of 47.7 months, the 5-year overall survival was 94.1% (range, 88.1%–97.3%), and the 5-year disease-free survival was 88.8% (range, 81.0%–92.6%).

Conclusions

The laparoscopic approach was favorable for both perioperative and postoperative morbidity. With the advantage of minimal invasiveness, laparoscopic treatment by experienced surgeons is an alternative for early-stage cervical cancer with correct long-term survival outcomes. Mini-invasive surgery could be the standard in early-stage cervical cancer.

Laparoscopic radical hysterectomy and pelvic lymphadenectomy can be routinely used for treatment of early-stage cervical cancer: a single-institute experience with 404 patients

STUDY OBJECTIVE

The aim of our study was to determine if laparoscopic radical hysterectomy (LRH) can be routinely used for the treatment of early-stage cervical cancer.

DESIGN

From May 2008, LRH was planned for all primarily operable cervical cancer patients after receiving informed consent in our department. The surgical and oncologic outcomes were retrospectively evaluated (Canadian Task Force classification III).

SETTING

University teaching hospital.

PATIENTS AND INTERVENTIONS

By August 2013, 404 patients with invasive cervical cancer were deemed operable, and all of them were subjected to upfront LRH, except 1 patient who insisted on open surgery.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

The planned LRH was abandoned in 3 patients because of inoperability. The median operative time was 240 minutes (range, 100-410 minutes). The median blood loss was 300 mL (range, 50-800 mL). The median number of harvested pelvic lymph nodes was 23.5 (range, 11-54). Two patients had positive surgical margins. Intraoperative complications occurred in 7 of the patients, and a conversion to open surgery was mandatory for 2 patients (conversion rate = 0.5%). Postoperative urinary tract fistula developed in 3 patients. Sixty-nine patients underwent adjuvant therapy. The median duration of follow-up was 31 months (range, 7-69 months). Thirty patients developed recurrent disease with a median disease-free interval of 12 months (range, 6-23 months), and 24 died of disease. The estimated 3-year overall survival rate was 94.9% in the women with a tumor ≤ IB1 and 81.3% in those with a tumor >IB1, and the 3-year progression-free survival rates were 94.1% and 79.6%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

LRH is adequate, safe, and feasible for women with cervical cancer, and it can be routinely used for the treatment of early-stage tumors as a primary modality.

Postoperative pain and perioperative outcomes after laparoscopic radical hysterectomy and abdominal radical hysterectomy in patients with early cervical cancer: a randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Non-randomised studies have suggested that the postoperative complications of (Campos LS, Limberger LF, Stein AT, Kalil AN) laparoscopic radical hysterectomy are similar to those in abdominal radical hysterectomy. However, no study evaluating postoperative pain comparing both techniques has been published thus far. Our objective was to compare pain intensity and other perioperative outcomes between laparoscopic radical hysterectomy (LRH) and abdominal radical hysterectomy (ARH) in early cervical cancer.

METHODS

This single centre, randomised, controlled trial enrolled 30 cervical cancer patients who were clinically staged IA2 with lymph vascular invasion and IB according to the FIGO (International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics) classification, and underwent LRH or ARH between late 1999 and early 2004. Postoperative pain, as measured by a 10-point numerical rate scale, was considered the primary endpoint. Postoperative pain was assessed every six hours during a patient's usual postoperative care. Perioperative outcomes were also registered. Both surgical techniques were executed by the same surgical team. Secondary outcomes included intraoperative and other postoperative surgicopathological factors and 5-year survival rates.

RESULTS

IA2 patients with lymphatic vascular space invasion and IB cervical cancer patients were randomised to either the LRH group (16 patients) or the ARH group (14 patients). Four patients (25%) in the LRH group and 5 patients (36%) in the ARH group presented with transoperative or serious postoperative complications. All of the transoperative complications occurred in the LRH group. The relative risk of presenting with complications was 0.70; CI 95% (0.23-2.11); P = 0.694. LRH group mean pain score was significantly lower than ARH after 36 h of observation (P = 0.044; mean difference score: 1.42; 95% CI: 0.04-2.80). The survival results will be published elsewhere.

CONCLUSIONS

LRH provided lower pain scores after 36 h of observation in this series. The perioperative and serious postoperative complications ratios were comparable between the groups.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT01258413.

Aspects of Therapy for Cervical Cancer in Germany 2012 - Results from a Survey of German Gynaecological Hospitals

Introduction: In spite of the existence of guidelines and international recommendations, many aspects in the diagnosis, therapy and follow-up of patients with cervical cancer are not based on validated data. A broad spectrum of different opinions and procedures concerning the therapy for patients with cervical cancer is under controversial discussion by the responsible gynaecologists in German hospitals. Methods: The present study is intended to picture the current treatment situation for cervical cancer in Germany. For this purpose a specially developed questionnaire with questions divided into 19 subsections was sent to all 688 gynaecological hospitals in Germany. Results: The response rate to the questionnaire was 34 %. 91 % of the hospitals treated between 0 and 25 patients with cervical cancer per year. 7.5 % treated between 26 and 50 and 1.4 % of the hospitals more than 50 patients per year. The bimanual examination was the most frequently used staging method (98 %); PET-CT was the least used staging method (2.3 %). Interestingly 48 % of the hospitals used surgical staging. The great majority of the hospitals (71 %) used abdominal radical hysterectomy (Wertheim-Meigs operation) to treat their patients. TMMR via laparotomy was used by 13 %. 16 % of the hospitals performed laparoscopic or robot-assisted radical hysterectomies. The sentinel concept was hardly used even in the early stages. It must be emphasised that in 74 % of the hospitals radical hysterectomies were performed even in cases with positive pelvic lymph nodes and in 43 % also in cases with positive paraaortic lymph nodes. The therapy of choice for FIGO IIB cancers is primary radiochemotherapy (RCTX) in 21 % of the hospitals; operative staging followed by radiochemotherapy in 24 % and treatment by radical hysterectomy followed by adjuvant RCTX was employed in this situation by 46 % of the hospitals. In 15-97 % of the hospitals for node-negative and in sano resected patients in stage pT1B1/1B2 after radical hysterectomy, an adjuvant RCTX is recommended when further risk factors exist (LVSI, tumour > 4 cm, age < 40 years, adenocarcinoma, S3). Conclusion: A broad spectrum of differing staging and therapy concepts is in use for patients with cervical cancer in Germany. A standardisation of therapy is needed. An update of national guidelines could help to achieve more transparency and a standardisation of treatment for patients with cervical cancer.

Can laparoscopic radical hysterectomy be a standard surgical modality in stage IA2-IIA cervical cancer?

OBJECTIVES

To determine if laparoscopic radical hysterectomy (LRH) can be substituted for radical abdominal hysterectomy for women with International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) stage IA2-IIA cervical cancer.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of cervical cancer patients who underwent LRH with laparoscopic pelvic lymphadenectomy (LPL) and/or laparoscopic para-aortic lymphadenectomy (LPAL) from March 2003 to December 2011.

RESULTS

Of 118 enrolled patients, six were in FIGO stage IA2, 66 were in IB1, 41 were in IB2, one was in IIA1, and four were in IIA2. The median operating time, perioperative hemoglobin change, the number of harvested pelvic and para-aortic lymph nodes were 270 min (range, 120-495), 1.7 g/dL (range, 0.1-5), 26 (range, 9-55), and 7 (range, 1-39), respectively. There was no unplanned conversion to laparotomy. Intra- and postoperative complications occurred in 16 (13.5%) and 8 (6.7%) patients, respectively. In a median follow-up of 31 months (range, 1-89), 5-year recurrence-free and overall survival rates were 90% and 89%, respectively. Univariate analysis showed that cervical stromal invasion (P=0.023) and lymph node metastasis (P=0.018) affected survival rate. Cox-proportional hazards regression analysis showed that lymph node metastasis was the only independent factor for poor prognosis (hazard ratio=7.0, P=0.022).

CONCLUSIONS

LRH with LPL and/or LPAL in women with stage IA2-IIA cervical cancer is safe and feasible in terms of survival and morbidity. Our data suggest the need for larger prospective trials which could support this approach as a new standard of care for stage IA2-IIA cervical cancer.