Surgical and oncologic outcomes after robotic radical hysterectomy as compared to open radical hysterectomy in the treatment of early cervical cancer

Comparison of outcomes of laparotomic and minimally invasive radical hysterectomy in women with early-stage cervical cancer

OBJECTIVE

This study compared the outcomes of laparotomic radical hysterectomy (LRH) and minimally invasive radical hysterectomy (MISRH) in patients with early-stage cervical cancer.

METHODS

The clinical data of patients with early-stage cervical cancer who underwent LRH or MISRH (laparoscopic/robotic) at Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Linkou Branch, from 2002 to 2017 were retrospectively reviewed. The surgical safety (operation time, blood loss, blood transfusion rate, length of postoperative stay, and perioperative complications), overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS), and recurrence pattern were analyzed. Propensity score matching (PSM) at a 3:1 ratio was performed to balance prognostic variables.

RESULTS

Of the 760 patients (entire cohort), 614 underwent LRH and 146 underwent MISRH. After PSM, 394 and 140 patients were included in the LRH and MISRH groups, respectively. The 5-year OS rate was significantly lower in the MISRH group than in the LRH group (85.6% vs. 93.2%, p=0.043), and the 5-year DFS rate (p=0.21) did not differ significantly. After PSM, the 5-year OS rates did not differ significantly between the MISRH and LRH groups (87.1% vs. 92.1%, p=0.393). The MISRH group had a significantly shorter operation time (p<0.001), lower intraoperative blood loss (p<0.001), lower blood transfusion rate (p<0.001), and shorter postoperative stay (p<0.001) but a significantly higher rate of intraoperative bladder injury (p<0.001) than the LRH group.

CONCLUSION

After PSM, MISRH is associated with nonsignificantly lower OS but a significantly higher risk of intraoperative urological complications than LRH.

Robotic radical hysterectomy for cervical cancer: current trends and controversies

Minimally invasive radical hysterectomy (MIRH) is widely performed as a treatment for early-stage cervical cancer. However, in 2018, a randomized controlled trial (RCT) called the Laparoscopic Approach to Cervical Cancer (LACC) trial showed that MIRH had poorer oncologic outcomes compared to laparotomy. Since then, several clinical studies have supported this finding, and most surgeons now perform MIRH with limited surgical indications. However, most of the reported studies evaluated laparoscopic radical hysterectomy rather than robotic radical hysterectomy (RRH). Robotic surgery has advantages for complex surgical procedures in the deep and narrow pelvic cavity in cervical cancer, making it necessary to evaluate the benefits and potential harms of RRH individually. Based on this systematic review, RRH is a safe and effective alternative to abdominal approach for early-stage cervical cancer. RRH offers significant perioperative benefits, including reduced blood loss, shorter hospital stays, and fewer complications, without compromising oncologic outcomes such as overall survival and progression-free survival. Additionally, surgeons should aim to minimize tumor cell spillage into the peritoneal cavity by eliminating the use of uterine manipulators or vaginal colpotomy. Ongoing RCTs will reveal whether we can perform RRH without oncologic compromise in cervical cancer.

Controversies and Advances in the Personalized Surgical Treatment of Cervical Cancer

Cervical cancer represents a global health issue as it is mostly encountered in women of reproductive age, while at the same time, survival outcomes seem to have remained constant during the last two decades. The need to implement fertility-sparing strategies as well as to decrease the morbidity that accompanies radical treatment has been extensively studied. During the last decade, several randomized clinical trials have been released, resulting in significant advances in the surgical treatment of early-stage disease. At the same time, evidence about the surgical treatment of advanced-stage disease as well as recurrent disease has gradually appeared and seems to be promising, thus leading the point forward towards personalized medicine that will remove the surgical barriers that seem concrete in our era. Nevertheless, the discrepancies in perioperative morbidity and survival outcomes that were observed among published studies raise several questions. In the present article, we chose to review the gray fields in the surgical treatment of early-stage and advanced-stage cervical cancer. Studies that are based on strong evidence that support current clinical practice are compared to smaller cohorts that present novel data that may form the basis for future research, and issues that remain poorly explored are discussed in an effort to help establish a consensus for future research development.

Comparison of the survival outcomes of laparoscopic, abdominal and gasless laparoscopic radical hysterectomy for early-stage cervical cancer: trial protocol of a multicenter randomized controlled trial (LAGCC trial)

Background

Radical hysterectomy (RH) is considered a cornerstone in the treatment of early-stage cervical cancer. However, the debate surrounding the optimal surgical approach, whether minimally invasive or open surgery, remains controversial. The objective of this trial is to evaluate the survival outcomes of cervical cancer patients who undergo different surgical approaches.

Methods

This study is designed as a prospective, multicenter, open, parallel, and randomized controlled trial. A total of 500 patients diagnosed with stage IA1 with LVSI, IA2, IB1, or IB2 (2018 FIGO) will be recruited. Recruitment of participants started in November 2020. The participants will be randomly assigned to one of three groups: conventional laparoscopic RH, gasless laparoscopic RH, or abdominal RH. The primary endpoint of this trial is the 2-year disease-free survival (DFS) rate. The secondary endpoints will include the 2-year overall survival (OS) rate, 5-year DFS/OS, recurrence rates, operation time, intraoperative blood loss, surgery-related complications, and impact on quality of life (QoL).

Discussion

We expect this trial to provide compelling and high-quality evidence to guide the selection of the most appropriate surgical approach for early-stage cervical cancer.

Clinical trial registration

Chinese Clinical Trial Register, identifier ChiCTR2000035515.

Patterns of recurrence in FIGO stage IB1-IB2 cervical cancer: Comparison between minimally invasive and abdominal radical hysterectomy

OBJECTIVE

Aim of our study was to evaluate whether the different laparotomic (ARH) or minimally invasive (laparoscopic and robotic) approaches (MIS) in FIGO stage IB1-IB2 cervical cancer, present different patterns of recurrence of the disease. The secondary endpoint of the study was the evaluation of the variables most involved with the risk of relapse and therefore lower DFS and OS.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The study enrolled patients with definitive histological diagnosis of squamous or adenocarcinoma stage IB1-IB2 cervical cancer who underwent minimally invasive or abdominal radical hysterectomy from 2001 to 2018.

RESULTS

The study enrolled 360 patients and 59 patients (16.4 %) reported a disease relapse. The data showed that ARH group was not associated with different recurrence patterns than MIS group (p = 0.14). Moreover, there was no statistically significant difference regarding DFS (p = 0.52) and OS (p = 0.29) between the ARH group and the MIS group.

CONCLUSIONS

MIS, in FIGO stage IB1-IB2 cervical cancer, is not associated with different relapse patterns compared to ARH, nor with a higher risk of distance metastasis and finally, without significant difference in term of DFS and OS. More studies are needed to determine the factors that modify the site of relapse.

lncRNA TINCR promotes the development of cervical cancer via the miRNA‑7/mTOR axis in vitro

The present study aimed to examine the effects of the long non-coding (lnc)RNA expressed by tissue differentiation-inducing non-protein coding RNA (TINCR) on cervical cancer development. For this purpose, adjacent normal and cancer tissues were obtained from patients with cervical cancer and the lncRNA TINCR level was examined using reverse transcription-quantitative PCR (RT-qPCR) and in situ hybridization. The association between lncRNA TINCR and the clinicopathological characteristics and prognosis of patients with cervical cancer was also analyzed. Furthermore, the expression levels of lncRNA TINCR, miRNA-7, mTOR, hypoxia-inducible factor 1 subunit α and VEGF were measured using RT-qPCR and western blot analysis. Cell proliferation, apoptosis, and invasion and migration were examined using MTT assay, 5-ethynyl-2'-deoxyuridine staining, flow cytometry, TUNEL assay, and Transwell and wound healing assays. The association between lncRNA TINCR, miRNA-7 and mTOR was also examined using a luciferase assay. The results revealed that the lncRNA TINCR level was significantly increased in cervical cancer tissues and was associated with the overall survival of patients (low vs. high expression group; P=0.0391). LncRNA TINCR was also associated with the clinicopathological characteristics of patients with cervical cancer. Following the knockdown of lncRNA TINCR using small interfering (si)RNA, cell proliferation was significantly decreased and cell apoptosis was significantly increased (P<0.001 for both); cell invasion and migration were also significantly decreased (P<0.001 for both) following transfection with mimics miRNA-7. Transfection with miRNA-7 antisense oligonucleotide decreased the antitumor effects of si-TINCR in Siha and HeLa cell lines. As shown using the dual-luciferase assay, lncRNA TINCR could target miRNA-7 and miRNA-7 could directly regulate mTOR in HeLa and SiHa cell lines. In conclusion, the present study demonstrated that lncRNA TINCR could promote cervical cancer development via regulation of the miRNA-7/mTOR axis in vitro.

Urological Complications in Radical Surgery for Cervical Cancer: A Comparative Meta-Analysis before and after LACC Trial

BACKGROUND

After the LACC trial publication in 2018, the minimally invasive approach (MIS) has severely decreased in favor of open surgery: MIS radical hysterectomy was associated with worse oncological outcomes than open surgery, but urological complications were never extensively explored in pre- versus post-LACC eras, even if they had a great impact on post-operative QoL. The purpose of this meta-analysis is to compare functional and organic urological complication rates before and after LACC trial.

METHODS

An independent search of the literature was conducted 4 years before and after the LACC trial and 50 studies were included.

RESULTS

The overall rate of urologic complications was higher in pre-LACC studies while no differences were found for organic urological complications. Conversely, the overall risk of dysfunctional urological complications showed a higher rate in the pre-LACC era. This is probably related to a sudden shift to open surgery, with potential lower thermal damage to the urinary tract autonomic nervous fibers.

CONCLUSIONS

This meta-analysis showed that the incidence of urological complications in radical cervical cancer surgery was higher before the LACC trial, potentially due to the shift to open surgery. Nevertheless, further studies are needed to shed light on the connection between minimally invasive surgery and urological damage.

Early-stage cervical cancer treatment - what's new?

The gold standard of treatment for patients with early-stage cervical cancer is radical hysterectomy, in agreement with the entire scientific community. During the last decade, growing evidence has supported the minimally invasive approach. Several studies have suggested that the minimally invasive approach could improve surgical and perioperative outcomes. Because of these findings, ESCO/ESTRO/ESP guidelines state that a "minimally invasive approach is favoured" in comparison with open surgery, as a grade B recommendation. Because of the lack of a grade A recommendation, this randomized Laparoscopic Approach to Cervical Cancer trial evaluated open vs. minimally invasive approach in the early stage. It demonstrated an increase in mortality among patients treated with minimally invasive surgery, revolutionizing current thinking on the primary surgical approach to early cervical cancer. The aim of this study is to analyse which is the best treatment for early cervical cancer and which approach is the most effective at the moment. Further studies are needed to state with certainty the appropriateness of the treatments offered to patients with early cervical cancer.

Survival outcomes of minimally invasive versus open radical hysterectomy in patients with early-stage IB1 to IIA2 cervical cancer: A single-center retrospective study

This study aimed to investigate the survival outcomes and prognostic factors associated with the surgical approach in patients with early-stage cervical cancer. We retrospectively analyzed 245 patients with stage IB1 to IIA2 cervical cancer who underwent radical hysterectomy with pelvic lymphadenectomy between 2004 and 2019 at Dong-A University Hospital. A total of 59 patients underwent minimally invasive surgery (MIS), and 186 patients underwent open surgery. There were no significant differences between the 2 groups, except for stromal invasion (P < .001), lymphovascular invasion (P = .001), and requirement for adjuvant therapy (P < .001). There were no significant differences in disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) based on the surgical approach. However, multivariate analyses showed MIS was an independent poor prognostic factor of DFS (adjusted hazard ratio [HR]: 230; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 086-0.614, P = .003) and OS (adjusted HR: 135; 95% CI: 041-0.451, P = .001). Adjuvant therapy was a poor prognostic factor for DFS (adjusted HR: 6.546; 95% CI: 1.384-30.952; P = .018), and deep stromal invasion was a poor prognostic factor for OS (adjusted HR: 8.715; 95% CI: 1.636-46.429; P = .01). MIS may be an independent poor prognostic factor for DFS and OS in patients who undergo radical hysterectomy for early-stage cervical cancer.

Effect of minimally invasive surgery and laparotomy on wound infection and postoperative and intraoperative complications in the management of cervical cancer: A meta-analysis

We performed a meta-analysis to evaluate the effect of minimally invasive surgery and laparotomy on wound infection and postoperative and intraoperative complications in the management of cervical cancer. A systematic literature search up to July 2022 was performed and 10 231 subjects with cervical cancer at the baseline of the studies; 4307 of them were using the minimally invasive surgery, and 5924 were using laparotomy. Odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated to assess the effect of minimally invasive surgery and laparotomy on wound infection and postoperative and intraoperative complications in the management of cervical cancer using the dichotomous methods with a random or fixed-effect model. The minimally invasive surgery had significantly lower wound infection (OR, 0.20; 95% CI, 0.13-0.30, P < .001), and postoperative complications (OR, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.37-0.64, P < .001) in subjects with cervical cancer compared laparotomy. However, minimally invasive surgery compared with laparotomy in subjects with cervical cancer had no significant difference in intraoperative complications (OR, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.80-1.36, P = 0.76). The minimally invasive surgery had significantly lower wound infection, and postoperative complications however, had no significant difference in intraoperative complications in subjects with cervical cancer compared with laparotomy. The analysis of outcomes should be with caution because of the low sample size of 22 out of 41 studies in the meta-analysis and a low number of studies in certain comparisons.

Outcomes associated with different surgical approaches to radical hysterectomy: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of five different approaches to cervical cancer surgery.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic search for comparative studies on different radical hysterectomy types for cervical cancer in PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases. All included observational studies used survival analyses to compare clinical outcomes of patients undergoing different radical hysterectomy types. All studies were assessed by the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale with scores of at least seven points. We extracted the relevant data and conducted a network meta-analysis to compare clinical outcomes among five surgical approaches.

RESULTS

Thirty studies (n = 11 353) were included. Robotic surgery had the lowest blood loss volume and hospitalization duration; open surgery had the shortest operative time. Vaginal assisted laparoscopic surgery was associated with the highest number of resected lymph nodes and lowest rate of perioperative complications. Survival outcomes and tumor recurrence outcomes were similar among the approaches.

CONCLUSION

The current approaches to cervical cancer surgery have comparable efficacies.

Surgical and oncologic outcomes between laparoscopic and radical abdominal hysterectomy for IB1-IIA2 cervical cancer

OBJECTIVE

To compare sugrical and survival outcomes between laparoscopic radical hysterectomy (LRH) and radical abdominal hysterectomy (RAH).

METHODS

All the patients with IB1-IIA2 cervical cancer who performed LRH or RAH in Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center between 1/2016 and 12/2017 were retrospectively analyzed.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences between LRH and RAH groups except deep stromal invasion (35.2% vs 54.4%, p = 0.000), operating time (232.3 ± 61.9 min vs. 106.7 ± 36.2 min, p = 0.000), blood loss (169.5 ± 96.2 ml vs. 219.6 ± 149.3 ml, p = 0.000), and lymph node counts (21.1 ± 7.1 vs. 23.2 ± 8.7 min, p = 0.012). The LRH group displayed poorer disease-free survival (DFS) (5-year rate, 79.4% vs. 90.0%; p = 0.046) and overall survival (OS) (5-year rate, 74.7% vs. 90.0%; p = 0.026) compared to the RAH group. On multivariate analysis, LRH was an independent risk factor for DFS (hazard ratio, 0.377; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.227-0.625; p = 0.000) and OS (hazard ratio, 0.434; 95% CI, 0.254-0.740; p = 0.003).

CONCLUSIONS

LRH affected the survival of cervical cancer patients with tumor size >2 cm (p < 0.05). Adjuvant therapy could not improve the prognosis of laparoscopic patients (p < 0.05).

The impacts of minimally invasive surgery on intermediate- or high-risk cervical cancer patients received adjuvant radiotherapy

BACKGROUND

Adjuvant chemoradiotherapy (CRT) has been shown to reduce the risk of recurrence for patients with risk factors after radical hysterectomy (RH). Early initiated CRT could result in superior oncological outcomes. Here, we aimed to compare the survival outcome of intermediate- or high-risk cervical cancer (CC) patients who, received adjuvant CRT between minimally invasive surgery (MIS) and open surgery.

METHODS

Data on stage IB1-IIA2 patients who underwent RH and postoperative CRT in our institution, from 2014 to 2017, were retrospectively collected. Patients with high or intermediate-risk factors who met the Sedlis criteria received sequential chemoradiation (SCRT). According to the surgical approaches, the enrolled patients were divided into MIS and open surgery groups. Then, the disease-free survival (DFS), overall survival (OS), and prognostic factors were analyzed.

RESULTS

Among 129 enrolled CC patients, 68 received open surgery and 61 received MIS. The median time interval from surgery to chemotherapy and to radiotherapy was shorter in the MIS group (7 days vs. 8 days, P=0.014; 28 days vs. 35, P<0.001). Three-year DFS and OS were similar in both groups (85.2% vs. 89.7%, P=0.274; 89.9% vs. 98.5%, P=0.499). Further, sub-analysis indicated that the DFS and OS in intermediate/high-risk groups had no significant difference. Cox-multivariate analyses found that tumor size >4 cm and time interval from surgery to radiotherapy beyond 7 weeks were adverse independent prognostic factors for DFS.

CONCLUSION

Based on the population we studied, for early-stage (IB1-IIA2) CC patients with intermediate- or high-risk factors who received postoperative SCRT, although the difference was not significant, the DFS and OS in the MIS group were slightly lower than the ORH group, and tumor size >4 cm and delayed adjuvant radiotherapy beyond 7 weeks were risk factors for recurrence.

Radical Hysterectomy for Early Stage Cervical Cancer

Radical hysterectomy and plus pelvic node dissection are the primary methods of treatment for patients with early stage cervical cancer. During the last decade, growing evidence has supported the adoption of a minimally invasive approach. Retrospective data suggested that minimally invasive surgery improves perioperative outcomes, without neglecting long-term oncologic outcomes. In 2018, the guidelines from the European Society of Gynaecological Oncology stated that a "minimally invasive approach is favored" in comparison with open surgery. However, the phase III, randomized Laparoscopic Approach to Cervical Cancer (LACC) trial questioned the safety of the minimally invasive approach. The LACC trial highlighted that the execution of minimally invasive radical hysterectomy correlates with an increased risk of recurrence and death. After its publication, other retrospective studies investigated this issue, with differing results. Recent evidence suggested that robotic-assisted surgery is not associated with an increased risk of worse oncologic outcomes. The phase III randomized Robotic-assisted Approach to Cervical Cancer (RACC) and the Robotic Versus Open Hysterectomy Surgery in Cervix Cancer (ROCC) trials will clarify the pros and cons of performing a robotic-assisted radical hysterectomy (with tumor containment before colpotomy) in early stage cervical cancer.

Does Vaginal Cuff Creation and Avoidance of a Uterine Manipulator Improve the Prognosis of Total Laparoscopic Radical Hysterectomy for Early Cervical Cancer? A Retrospective Multicenter Study

Our goal was to compare the treatment outcomes of open-abdominal radical hysterectomy (O-RH) and total laparoscopic hysterectomy (TLRH) with vaginal cuff creation and without using a uterine manipulator in stage IB1-B2 (tumor size < 4 cm) cervical cancer cases. In this retrospective multicenter analysis, 94 cervical cancer stage IB1-B2 patients who underwent O-RH or TLRH in six hospitals in Japan between September 2016 and July 2020 were included; 36 patients underwent TLRH. Propensity score matching was performed because the tumor diameter was large, and positive cases of lymph node metastases were included in the O-RH group due to selection bias. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) and recurrence sites of TLRH and O-RH. PFS and OS (overall survival) were not significant in both the TLRH (n = 27) and O-RH (n = 27) groups; none required conversion to laparotomy. The maximum tumor size was <2 and ≥2 cm in 12 (44.4%) and 15 (55.6%) patients, respectively, in both groups. Reportedly, the TLRH group had lesser bleeding than the O-RH group (p < 0.001). Median follow-up was 33.5 (2−65) and 41.5 (6−75) months in the TLRH and O-RH groups, respectively. PFS and OS were not significantly different between the two groups (TLRH: 92.6%, O-RH: 92.6%; log-rank p = 0.985 and 97.2%, 100%; p = 0.317, respectively). The prognosis of early cervical cancer was not significantly different between TLRH and O-RH. Tumor spillage was prevented by creating a vaginal cuff and avoiding the use of a uterine manipulator. Therefore, TLRH might be considered efficient.

The MEMORY Study: MulticentEr study of Minimally invasive surgery versus Open Radical hYsterectomy in the management of early-stage cervical cancer: Survival outcomes

OBJECTIVE

The Laparoscopic Approach to Cervical Cancer (LACC) trial found that minimally invasive radical hysterectomy compared to open radical hysterectomy compromised oncologic outcomes and was associated with worse progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in early-stage cervical carcinoma. We sought to assess oncologic outcomes at multiple centers between minimally invasive (MIS) radical hysterectomy and OPEN radical hysterectomy.

METHODS

This is a multi-institutional, retrospective cohort study of patients with 2009 FIGO stage IA1 (with lymphovascular space invasion) to IB1 cervical carcinoma from 1/2007-12/2016. Patients who underwent preoperative therapy were excluded. Squamous cell carcinoma, adenocarcinoma, and adenosquamous carcinomas were included. Appropriate statistical tests were used.

RESULTS

We identified 1093 cases for analysis-715 MIS (558 robotic [78%]) and 378. OPEN procedures. The OPEN cohort had more patients with tumors >2 cm, residual disease in the hysterectomy specimen, and more likely to have had adjuvant therapy. Median follow-up for the MIS and OPEN cohorts were 38.5 months (range, 0.03-149.51) and 54.98 months (range, 0.03-145.20), respectively. Three-year PFS rates were 87.9% (95% CI: 84.9-90.4%) and 89% (95% CI: 84.9-92%), respectively (P = 0.6). On multivariate analysis, the adjusted HR for recurrence/death was 0.70 (95% CI: 0.47-1.03; P = 0.07). Three-year OS rates were 95.8% (95% CI: 93.6-97.2%) and 96.6% (95% CI: 93.8-98.2%), respectively (P = 0.8). On multivariate analysis, the adjusted HR for death was 0.81 (95% CI: 0.43-1.52; P = 0.5).

CONCLUSION

This multi-institutional analysis showed that an MIS compared to OPEN radical hysterectomy for cervical cancer did not appear to compromise oncologic outcomes, with similar PFS and OS.

More work is needed on cost-utility analyses of robotic-assisted surgery

OBJECTIVE

To comprehensively analyze the cost-utility of robotic surgery in clinical practice and to investigate the reporting and methodological quality of the related evidence.

METHODS

Data on cost-utility analyses (CUAs) of robotic surgery were collected in seven electronic databases from the inception to July 2021. The quality of the included studies was assessed using the CHEERs and QHES checklists. A systematic review was performed with the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio as the outcome of interest.

RESULTS

Thirty-one CUAs of robotic surgery were eligible. Overall, the identified CUAs were fair to high quality, and 63% of the CUAs ranked the cost-utility of robotic surgery as "favored," 32% categorized as "reject," and the remaining 5% ranked as "unclear." Although a high heterogeneity was present in terms of the study design among the included CUAs, most studies (81.25%) consistently found that robotic surgery was more cost-utility than open surgery for prostatectomy (ICER: $6905.31/QALY to $26240.75/QALY; time horizon: 10 years or lifetime), colectomy (dominated by robotic surgery; time horizon: 1 year), knee arthroplasty (ICER: $1134.22/QALY to $1232.27/QALY; time horizon: lifetime), gastrectomy (dominated by robotic surgery; time horizon: 1 year), spine surgery (ICER: $17707.27/QALY; time horizon: 1 year), and cystectomy (ICER: $3154.46/QALY; time horizon: 3 months). However, inconsistent evidence was found for the cost-utility of robotic surgery versus laparoscopic surgery and (chemo)radiotherapy.

CONCLUSIONS

Fair or high-quality evidence indicated that robotic surgery is more cost-utility than open surgery, while it remains inconclusive whether robotic surgery is more cost-utility than laparoscopic surgery and (chemo)radiotherapy. Thus, an additional evaluation is required.

Comparison of Survival Outcomes between Minimally Invasive Surgery and Open Radical Hysterectomy in Early-Stage Cervical Cancer

OBJECTIVES

To compare the survival outcomes between minimally invasive surgery (MIS) and laparotomy radical hysterectomy in patients with early-stage cervical cancer.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective study involving women who received a radical hysterectomy for cervical cancer, stage IA1 with lymphovascular invasion, IA2, IB1, IB2, or IIA from 2008 to 2016. Clinicopathologic and perioperative outcomes were compared using appropriate statistical methodologies.

RESULTS

Oncologic survival outcomes were analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier method. Among the 105 cases identified, 58 (55.2%) and 47 (44.8%) women underwent MIS and open radical hysterectomy, respectively. Over a median follow-up period of 62 months, women who underwent MIS and open radical hysterectomy had a 5-year overall survival rate of 87.9% and 89.4% (p = 0.845) and a 5-year disease-free survival rate of 82.5% and 86.7% (p = 0.624), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

For early-stage cervical cancer, patients who underwent MIS radical hysterectomy had survival outcomes that were comparable to those who underwent open surgery at our institute.

Expressive Arts Therapy Combined with Progressive Muscle Relaxation following Music for Perioperative Patients with Gynecological Malignancies: A Pilot Study

Objective

We aimed to assess the impact of an expressive arts therapy combined with progressive muscle relaxation following music on mental health (anxiety and hope) in patients with gynecological malignancies undergoing surgery.

Methods

This was a nonrandomized controlled trial. Eligible patients had a primary or recurrent gynecological malignancy scheduled to be treated with surgery. The intervention consisted of three sessions (preoperation, postoperation, and predischarge) during the perioperative period. Firstly, before starting the first session of intervention, all patients completed three questionnaires including a Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), a Herth Hope Index (HHI), and a State Anxiety Inventory (SAI), and the intervention group patients also had to complete the SAI questionnaire again after completing the intervention. Secondly, after the second session of intervention, all patients completed the SAI questionnaire, with the intervention group completed the SAI questionnaire before the intervention. Thirdly, after the third session of intervention, all patients completed HHI and SAI questionnaires, with the intervention group completed the SAI questionnaire before the intervention. Also, to subjectively rate the benefit of expressive arts therapy, the intervention group additionally completed a separate, supplemental questionnaire.

Results

A total of 116 patients were enrolled and 110 included in the final analysis. No group differences were found for HHI scores between the intervention and control participants (Cohen's d = 0.19, P=0.31), although there was a substantial improvement in intervention participants' HHI scores compared to the standard care control participants. There was a statistically significant improvement in intervention participants' SAI from preintervention to postintervention of preoperation (Cohen's d = −0.23, P=0.002) and postoperation (Cohen's d = −0.34, P ≤ 0.001). However, no differences were observed for the predischarge period (Cohen's d = −0.09, P=0.118). Besides, a supplemental questionnaire indicated that 52 (98%) patients felt that expressive arts therapy was beneficial.

Conclusions

Expressive art therapy combined with progressive muscle relaxation under music may be of some effect on alleviating perioperative anxiety in patients with gynecologic malignancies. Therefore, further relevant studies with large samples and multicenters are urgently needed to provide a reliable evidence-based basis for perioperative psychological care of patients with gynecologic malignancies and to promote rapid recovery of patients. It is recommended that further art therapy studies to examine the impact of patient-tailored arts therapy interventions on spiritual well-being in patients with gynecological malignancies, especially in the perioperative period.

Radical Hysterectomy for Cervical Cancer: the Right Surgical Approach

OPINION STATEMENT

Radical hysterectomy with pelvic lymph node assessment is the standard initial therapy for early-stage cervical cancer. Radical hysterectomy via laparotomy (an "open" approach) was first described more than 100 years ago and has been the standard for decades. Minimally invasive surgery (MIS) has been increasingly adopted by many surgeons due to its reported perioperative benefits. MIS was deemed safe for radical hysterectomy for many years based on multiple retrospective publications. Recently, the Laparoscopic Approach to Cervical Cancer (LACC) trial reported that patients randomized to MIS had inferior oncologic outcomes. The results of the LACC trial and subsequent retrospective studies led multiple professional societies to state that open radical hysterectomy should remain the gold standard surgical approach. We acknowledge that the open approach for radical hysterectomy is an appropriate option for all cervical cancer patients eligible for surgical treatment. However, considering the limitations of the LACC trial and the available data from other retrospective studies, we feel the MIS approach should not be simply abandoned. There may still be a role for MIS in cervical cancer surgery for properly and carefully selected cases and with detailed counseling; surgeons should analyze their own outcomes closely in order to perform such counseling. Modification of surgical technique and maintaining proper oncologic surgical principles are key for MIS to remain a viable option. Tumor manipulation and contamination should be avoided. Transcervical uterine manipulators should not be used. Cervical and tumor containment prior to colpotomy, as is performed during an open approach, is required. This will all require validation in future trials. We await the results of ongoing randomized trials to further inform us. A one-size-fits-all approach may be short-sighted; we may need to decide treatment strategy based on the notion of the right surgical approach for the right patient by the right surgeon.

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

Background

Although minimally invasive surgery (MIS) was commonly used to treat patients with early-stage cervical cancer, its efficacy remained controversial.

Methods

We systematically searched PubMed, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases until March 2021 to compare the prognosis of early-stage cervical cancer patients who underwent MIS (laparoscopic or robot-assisted radical hysterectomy) or ARH. The primary outcomes included rates of 3- and 5-year disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS). The study protocol was registered in PROSPERO: CRD42021258116.

Results

This meta-analysis included 48 studies involving 23346 patients (11220, MIS group; 12126, ARH group). The MIS group had a poorer medium-term (3-year) DFS (HR=1.08, 95% CI: 1.01-1.16, p=0.031) than the ARH group, without significant difference in medium-term OS as well as long-term (5-year) DFS and OS. Subgroup analysis of 3-year prognosis revealed that although patients in Western countries who underwent MIS had shorter DFS than those who underwent ARH (HR=1.10, p=0.024), no difference was observed in DFS among those in Asian countries. Moreover, MIS was linked to poorer 3-year DFS in patients with stage I cervical cancer (HR=1.07, p=0.020). Notably, subgroup analysis of 5-year prognosis revealed that patients with tumor size ≥2 cm undergoing MIS exhibited a shorter DFS than those who underwent ARH (HR=1.65, p=0.041).

Conclusion

Patients with early-stage cervical cancer undergoing MIS may have a poorer prognosis than those undergoing ARH. Therefore, applying MIS in early-stage cervical cancer patients should be conducted with caution.

Systematic Review Registration

The study protocol was registered in PROSPERO: CRD42021258116.

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

Purpose

To explore the possible factors that contributed to the poor performance of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) versus abdominal surgery regarding progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in cervical cancer.

Methods

MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library and Web of Science were searched (January 2000 to April 2021). Study selection was performed by two researchers to include studies reported oncological safety. Summary hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were combined using random-effect model. Subgroup analyses were stratified by characteristics of disease, publication, study design and treatment center.

Results

Sixty-one studies with 63,369 patients (MIS 26956 and ARH 36,049) were included. The overall-analysis revealed a higher risk of recurrence (HR 1.209; 95% CI 1.102–1.327) and death (HR 1.124; 95% CI 1.013–1.248) after MIS versus ARH expect in FIGO IB1 (FIGO 2009 staging) patients with tumor size less than 2 cm. However, subgroup analyses showed comparable PFS/DFS and OS in studies published before the Laparoscopic Approach to Cervical Cancer (LACC) trial, published in European journals, conducted in a single center, performed in centers in Europe and in centers with high sample volume or high MIS sample volume.

Conclusion

Our findings highlight possible factors that associated with inferior survival after MIS in cervical cancer including publication characteristics, center-geography and sample volume. Center associated factors were needed to be taken into consideration when evaluating complex surgical procedures like radical hysterectomy.

Influence of steep Trendelenburg position on postoperative complications: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Intraoperative physiologic changes related to the steep Trendelenburg position have been investigated with the widespread adoption of robot-assisted pelvic surgery (RAPS). However, the impact of the steep Trendelenburg position on postoperative complications remains unclear. We conducted a meta-analysis to compare RAPS to laparoscopic/open pelvic surgery with regards to the rates of venous thromboembolism (VTE), cardiac, and cerebrovascular complications. Meta-regression was performed to evaluate the influence of confounding risk factors. Ten randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 47 non-randomized controlled studies (NRSs), with a total of 380,125 patients, were included. Although RAPS was associated with a decreased risk of VTE and cardiac complications compared to laparoscopic/open pelvic surgery in NRSs [risk ratio (RR), 0.59; 95% CI 0.51–0.72, p < 0.001 and RR 0.93; 95% CI 0.58–1.50, p = 0.78, respectively], these differences were not confirmed in RCTs (RR 0.92; 95% CI 0.52–1.62, p = 0.77 and RR 0.93; 95% CI 0.58–1.50, p = 0.78, respectively). In subgroup analyses of laparoscopic surgery, there was no significant difference in the risk of VTE and cardiac complications in both RCTs and NRSs. In the meta-regression, none of the risk factors were found to be associated with heterogeneity. Furthermore, no significant difference was observed in cerebrovascular complications between RAPS and laparoscopic/open pelvic surgery. Our meta-analysis suggests that the steep Trendelenburg position does not seem to affect postoperative complications and, therefore, can be considered safe with regard to the risk of VTE, cardiac, and cerebrovascular complications. However, proper individualized preventive measures should still be implemented during all surgeries including RAPS to warrant patient safety.

The Surgeon's Proficiency Affected Survival Outcomes of Minimally Invasive Surgery for Early-Stage Cervical Cancer: A Retrospective Study of 851 Patients

Purpose

To compare the clinical outcomes of patients with early-stage cervical cancer who underwent minimally invasive surgery (MIS) by surgeons in different phases and evaluate whether the proficiency of surgeons affects the survival outcomes.

Materials and Methods

A total of 851 patients with early-stage cervical cancer who underwent radical hysterectomy between January 2008 and June 2018 (every year from January to June) at a tertiary hospital were retrospectively analyzed. We categorized patients into four phases according to their sequence (phase one, 1-10 cases; phase two: 11-20 cases; phase three: 21-30 cases; phase four: > 30 cases). Demographics and clinical and pathological data were collected and analyzed.

Results

There were no statistical differences between the open surgery and MIS groups regarding three- and five-year overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS). The OS and DFS of patients in the MIS group in phase one were significantly lower than those in later phases and those in the open surgery group after adjustment (OS, P = 0.009; HR, 2.896; 95%CI, 1.303-6.435; DFS, P = 0.009; HR, 2.712; 95%CI, 1.289-5.706). Survival outcomes were not statistically significant when comparing different surgeons.

Conclusion

The phase one cases of MIS had lower OS and DFS than those in later phases and those in the open surgery group. Thus, we suggest that the proficiency of surgeons is associated with survival outcomes of MIS. Favorable outcomes can be obtained after a certain number of MIS cases.

Oncologic Outcomes of Laparoscopic Radical Hysterectomy Using the No-Look No-Touch Technique for Early Stage Cervical Cancer: A Propensity Score-Adjusted Analysis

Simple Summary

Minimally invasive radical hysterectomy is contraindicated in early stage cervical cancer cases because of poor prognosis. The no-look no-touch technique (NLNT) eliminates intraoperative tumor spillage and may improve survival outcomes. We evaluated oncologic outcomes of laparoscopic radical hysterectomy performed using NLNT. We compared the outcomes of abdominal radical hysterectomy and NLNT using inverse probability of treatment weighting. We found no significant differences in disease-free survival between the groups, even in patients with tumor sizes ≥ 2 cm. We also studied NLNT’s non-inferiority to abdominal radical hysterectomy by evaluating heterogeneity between the results of the Laparoscopic Approach to Cervical Cancer (LACC) trial and those of our study. We did not observe significant heterogeneity, although there was a trend toward a lower hazard ratio in our study compared with the non-inferiority margin in the LACC trial. Laparoscopic radical hysterectomy using NLNT is a plausible alternative surgical treatment for early stage cervical cancer.

Abstract

We evaluated oncologic outcomes of laparoscopic radical hysterectomy using the no-look no-touch technique (NLNT). We analyzed patients with early stage (IA2, IB1, and IIA1, FIGO2008) cervical cancer treated between December 2014 and December 2019. The primary endpoint was disease-free survival (DFS). We compared the outcomes of the abdominal radical hysterectomy (ARH) and NLNT groups using a Cox model with inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW), according to propensity scores. We also evaluated NLNT’s non-inferiority to ARH using an evaluation of heterogeneity between the results of the Laparoscopic Approach to Cervical Cancer (LACC) trial and our study. ARH and NLNT were performed in 118 and 113 patients, respectively. The median follow-up duration was 3.2 years. After IPTW adjustment, the 3-year DFS rates (NLNT 92.4%; ARH 94.0%) and overall survival rates did not differ significantly between the groups. Furthermore, the 3-year DFS rates for patients with tumor sizes ≥ 2 cm in the NLNT (85.0%) and ARH (90.3%) groups did not differ significantly. No significant heterogeneity was observed between the LACC trial and our study (I² = 60.5%, p = 0.111), although there was a trend toward a lower hazard ratio in our study. Laparoscopic radical hysterectomy using NLNT provides a favorable prognosis for early stage cervical cancer.

Pattern of relapse in patients with stage IB1 cervical cancer after radical hysterectomy as primary treatment. Minimally invasive surgery vs. open approach. Systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

After the LACC trial, the SUCCOR study, and other studies, we know that patients who have undergone minimally invasive surgery for cervical cancer have worse outcomes, but today, we do not know if the surgical approach can be a reason to change the pattern of relapses on these patients. We evaluated the relapse pattern in patients with stage IB1 cervical cancer (FIGO, 2009) who underwent radical hysterectomy with different surgical approaches.

METHODS

A systematic review of literature was performed in PubMed, Cochrane Library, Clinicaltrials.gov, and Web of science. Inclusion criteria were prospective or retrospective comparative studies of different surgical approaches that described patterns or locations of relapse in patients with stage IB1 cervical cancer. Heterogeneity was assessed by calculating I2.

RESULTS

The research resulted in 782 eligible citations from January 2010 to October 2020. After filtering, nine articles that met all inclusion criteria were analyzed, comprising data from 1663 patients who underwent radical hysterectomy for IB1 cervical cancer, and the incidence of relapse was 10.6%. When we compared the pattern of relapse (local, distant, and both) of each group (open surgery and minimally invasive surgery), we did not see statistically significant differences, (OR 0.963; 95% CI, 0.602-1.541; p = 0.898), (OR 0.788; 95% CI, 0.467-1.330; p = 0.542), and (OR 0.683; 95% CI, 0.331-1.407; p = 0.630), respectively.

CONCLUSION

There are no differences in patterns of relapse across surgical approaches in patients with stage IB1 cervical cancer undergoing radical hysterectomy as primary treatment.

Robotic radical hysterectomy versus open radical hysterectomy for cervical cancer: a single-centre experience from India

To compare the disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) at 3 years and 5 years in patients undergoing treatment for early-stage cervical cancer with either robotic (RRH) or open radical hysterectomy (ORH). This retrospective study compared all patients with stage IA1 (lymphovascular invasion), IA2, IB1, IB2 and II A cervical cancer in accordance with International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics staging (FIGO 2009) of cancer of the cervix uteri. Patients who underwent Radical Hysterectomy at our centre from January 2011 till January 2018 were included in the study. One hundred and eighty-nine patients ( ORH = 67, RRH = 122) were included. The median follow-up time was 46.3 months in RRH group and 70.0 months in the ORH group. The 3-year DFS was comparable in both the arms, 91.5% in RRH and 91.6% in ORH. The 5-year DFS was 88.9% and 85.9% in robotic and open approaches, respectively (P = 0.258), hazard ratio (HR) 0.616 (CI = 0.266-1.427). The 3-year overall survival for robotic approach was 93.4% and for open was 95%, whereas 5-year overall survival was 84.7% and 87.4% in robotic and open approaches, respectively (P = 0.813). The median estimated blood loss for robotics was lower (100 ml vs 300 ml, P < 0.001) and median operative time was less (162.5 min vs. 180 min, P = 0.005) in robotics. The patients in RRH cohort had shorter median hospital stay (3.9 days vs. 6.3 days, P < 0.001). Robotic radical hysterectomy had comparable survival outcomes to open radical hysterectomy in cancer cervix. RRH is associated with improved peri-operative surgical outcomes and better resource utilisation.

Hybrid Robotic and Laparoscopic Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer: Comparison with Conventional Laparoscopic Gastrectomy

Purpose

The benefits of robotic gastrectomy remain controversial. We designed this study to elucidate the advantages of a hybrid robot and laparoscopic gastrectomy over conventional laparoscopic surgery.

Materials and Methods

A total of 176 patients who underwent gastrectomy for gastric cancer were included in this study. We compared 88 patients treated with hybrid robotic and laparoscopic gastrectomy (HRLG) and 88 patients who underwent conventional laparoscopic gastrectomy (CLG). In HRLG, suprapancreatic lymph node (LN) dissection was performed in a robotic setting. Clinicopathological characteristics, operative details, and short-term outcomes were analyzed for the patients.

Results

The number of LNs retrieved from the suprapancreatic area was significantly greater in the HRLG group (11.27±5.46 vs. 9.17±5.19, P=0.010). C-reactive protein levels were greater in the CLG group on both postoperative day (POD) 1 (5.11±2.64 vs. 4.29±2.38, P=0.030) and POD 5 (9.86±6.51 vs. 7.75±5.17, P=0.019). In addition, the neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio was significantly greater in the CLG group on both POD 1 (7.44±4.72 vs. 6.16±2.91, P=0.031) and POD 5 (4.87±3.75 vs. 3.81±1.87, P=0.020). Pulmonary complications occurred only in the CLG group (4/88 [4.5%] vs. 0/88 [0%], P=0.043).

Conclusions

HRLG is superior to CLG in terms of suprapancreatic LN dissection and postoperative inflammatory response.

Surveillance of radical hysterectomy for early-stage cervical cancer in the early experienced period of minimally invasive surgery in Japan

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of our study was to conduct a detailed survey of radical hysterectomy in Japanese patients with early-stage cervical cancer, and to compare oncologic outcomes between open and minimally invasive radical hysterectomy.

METHODS

In Japan during 2015, the medical records of 929 patients with FIGO stage IB1 and IIA disease treated with radical hysterectomy were retrospectively reviewed. We assessed patients' characteristics, disease-free survival (DFS), overall survival (OS) and prognostic factors for survival.

RESULTS

The median patient age was 44 (20-80) years. Most patients (94.4%) had stage IB1 disease. Of the patients who underwent radical hysterectomy, 91.2% underwent open surgery and 8.8% underwent minimally invasive surgery (MIS). The median follow-up period was 40.8 months (range, 0.49-51.1 months). The rate of DFS and OS at 4 years in all patients was 88.3% and 96.4%, respectively. Multivariate analysis identified age (≥ 47), adenocarcinoma histology, tumor size (≥ 2 cm), parametrial invasion, positive lymph node metastasis and institutional accreditation as independent predictors of recurrence, and adenocarcinoma, other cell types, and positive lymph node metastasis as independent predictors of death. Oncologic outcomes in all patients were similar between open and MIS, including DFS and OS.

CONCLUSION

The survival rate of the Japanese patients underwent radical hysterectomy for early-stage cervical cancer was favorable. No significant differences were observed for DFS and OS between open and MIS performed by a limited number of surgeons at a limited number of facilities in Japan. Further investigations are required to identify the appropriate patients might benefit from MIS.

Postoperative health-related quality of life of patients with gynecological malignancy: a meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

We sought to describe the short-term (1, 3, 6, 12 months) QoL changes after surgery for patients with gynecological malignancies in a meta-analysis.

METHODS

We collected studies based on the PICOS (patients, intervention, comparison, outcome, and study design) framework (P: patients with gynecological malignancy; I: surgery; C: presurgery; O: QoL scores; S: randomized controlled trials, case-control studies, or cohort studies) in the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, EBSCO, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) databases up to June 28, 2020. Then, two reviewers independently performed article screening, data extraction, and study quality evaluation. Stata 15.0 software was utilized for data analysis.

RESULTS

Nine studies with 1476 patients were ultimately included. QoL in global health status improved until 12 months after surgery with a maximum improvement (6.99 [0.31, 13.68], P = 0.04), and QoL in emotional functioning reduced significantly until 12 months after surgery with a maximum reduction (14.87 [10.29, 19.45], P < 0.00001). All of the symptom scales were reduced significantly until 12 months postoperation, indicating quality of life improvement. There was a clinical reduction in QoL but symptom experience (-3.31 [-5.51, -1.12], P=0.003) at six months after surgery compared with baseline (presurgery), with only sexual worry being statistically significant (4.61 [0.95, 8.27], P=0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

The recovery time varied among each dimension of the postoperative QoL of patients with gynecological malignancies; only a few functions and symptoms began to improve at 1 month postoperation and more at 12 months postoperation. Therefore, it is vitally important to develop extended care programs targeting the multidimensional aspects of QoL for patients with gynecological malignancies after surgery.

Adjuvant Radiotherapy After Minimally Invasive Surgery in Patients With Stage IA1-IIA1 Cervical Cancer

To estimate whether adjuvant radiotherapy is necessary for patients with stage IA1-IIA1 cervical cancer after laparoscopic hysterectomy, 221 patients were retrospectively analyzed. Sixty-two of them were treated with laparoscopic hysterectomy and adjuvant radiotherapy (group A), 115 underwent open surgery (group B) and 44 received laparoscopic hysterectomy alone (group C). Results showed that the 3-year local recurrence-free survival (LRFS) rates of group A, B and C were 98.4%, 97.4% and 86.4%, respectively. The LRFS rates of group A and B surpassed C (A vs. B, p=0.634; A vs. C, p=0.011; B vs. C, p=0.006). The inter-group differences of 3-year overall survival (OS) and distant metastasis free survival (DMFS) were not statistically significant. In subgroup analysis of stage IB disease, the 3-year LRFS rates of group A, B and C were 100%, 98.8% and 83.1%, the 3-year OS rates of group A, B and C were 100%, 98.9% and 91.5%, respectively. The 3-year LRFS and OS rates of group A and B were significantly superior to group C (p<0.05). Our findings suggest that adjuvant radiotherapy can reduce the risk of recurrence for women with early-stage cervical cancer after laparoscopic hysterectomy and bring survival benefits for patients with stage IB disease.

Comparison of the complications between minimally invasive surgery and open surgical treatments for early-stage cervical cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

This meta-analysis comprehensively compared intraoperative and postoperative complications between minimally invasive surgery (MIS) and laparotomy in the management of cervical cancer. Even though the advantages of laparotomy over MIS in disease-free survival and overall survival for management of gynecological diseases have been cited in the literature, there is a lack of substantial evidence of the advantage of one surgical modality over another, and it is uncertain whether MIS is justifiable in terms of safety and efficacy.

METHODS

In this meta-analysis, the studies were abstracted that the outcomes of complications to compare MIS (laparoscopic or robot-assisted) and open radical hysterectomy in patients with early-stage (International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics classification stage IA1-IIB) cervical cancer. The primary outcomes were intraoperative overall complications, as well as postoperative aggregate complications. Secondary outcomes included the individual complications. Two investigators independently performed the screening and data extraction. All articles that met the eligibility criteria were included in this meta-analysis.

RESULTS

The meta-analysis finally included 39 non-randomized studies and 1 randomized controlled trial (8 studies were conducted on robotic radical hysterectomy (RRH) vs open radical hysterectomy (ORH), 27 studies were conducted on laparoscopic radical hysterectomy (LRH) vs ORH, and 5 studies were conducted on all three approaches). Pooled analyses showed that MIS was associated with higher risk of intraoperative overall complications (OR = 1.41, 95% CI = 1.07-1.86, P<0.05) in comparison with ORH. However, compared to ORH, MIS was associated with significantly lower risk of postoperative aggregate complications (OR = 0.40, 95% CI = 0.34-0.48, P = 0.0143). In terms of individual complications, MIS appeared to have a positive effect in decreasing the complications of transfusion, wound infection, pelvic infection and abscess, lymphedema, intestinal obstruction, pulmonary embolism, deep vein thrombosis, and urinary tract infection. Furthermore, MIS had a negative effect in increasing the complications of cystotomy, bowel injury, subcutaneous emphysema, and fistula.

CONCLUSIONS

Our meta-analysis demonstrates that MIS is superior to laparotomy, with fewer postoperative overall complications (wound infection, pelvic infection and abscess, lymphedema, intestinal obstruction, pulmonary embolism, and urinary tract infection). However, MIS is associated with a higher risk of intraoperative aggregate complications (cystotomy, bowel injury, and subcutaneous emphysema) and postoperative fistula complications.

Minimally invasive surgery and abdominal radical hysterectomy in patients with early-stage cervical cancer: A meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To compare risk of recurrence and death related to minimally invasive surgery (MIS) and abdominal radical hysterectomy (ARH) in early-stage cervical cancer (CC) patients.

METHODS

All relevant literatures in databases were retrieved from the built time of databases to October 2020. Observational studies comparing MIS and ARH in early-stage CC patients were involved. Newcastle-Ottawa Scale was used for quality assessment, including studies with a score of at least 6. Main outcomes involved overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS).

RESULTS

Twenty-two studies were involved, including 14 894 patients, among which 7213 (48.6%) underwent MIS. The OS (hazard ratio [HR] 1.23, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.03-1.43) and DFS (HR 1.25, 95% CI 1.07-1.42) of patients undergoing MIS was obviously shortened compared with those of patients undergoing ARH. Subgroup analysis revealed that OS (HR 1.42, 95% CI 1.10-1.74) and DFS (HR 1.46, 95% CI 1.18-1.74) of patients with a tumor ≥2 cm in diameter were significantly reduced by MIS.

CONCLUSION

Overall survival and DFS after MIS for early-stage CC treatment were worse than those after ARH, especially for patients with a tumor ≥2 cm in diameter.

Survival Outcomes in Patients With 2018 FIGO Stage IA2-IIA2 Cervical Cancer Treated With Laparoscopic Versus Open Radical Hysterectomy: A Propensity Score-Weighting Analysis

Objective

To compare the survival and recurrence outcomes between open and laparoscopic radically hysterectomy (RH) for stage IA2-IIA2 cervical cancer based on Federation International of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) 2018.

Methods

Data of 1,373 early cervical cancer patients undergoing open or laparoscopic radically hysterectomy at ShengJing Hospital of China Medical University between January 1, 2013, and December 31, 2016, were retrospectively reviewed. Propensity score-based inverse probability of treatment weighting (PS-IPTW) was used to balance the covariates between the two groups.

Results

A total of 705 cervical cancer patients of FIGO 2009 stage IA2-IIA2 were finally enrolled in this study. After IPTW adjustment, the OS (HR = 2.095, 95% CI: 1.233-3.562, P = 0.006) and PFS (HR = 1.950, 95%CI: 1.194-3.184, P = 0.008) rates were significantly higher in the open RH (ORH) group compared with the laparoscopic RH (LRH) group. Then after re-staging according to the FIGO 2018 staging system, 561 patients still belonged to stage IA2-IIA2, 144 patients were upgraded to stage IIIC1p-IIIC2p. The ORH group had a significantly superior OS (HR = 1.977, 95%CI: 1.077-3.626, P = 0.028) and PFS (HR = 1.811, 95%CI: 1.046-3.134, P = 0.034) compared with the LRH group after PS-IPTW analysis. Furthermore, in patients with no high and intermediate risks, difference of the OS (HR = 1.386, 95%CI: 0.287-6.69, P = 0.684) and PFS (HR = 1.524, 95%CI: 0.363-6.396, P = 0.565) rates between the two groups were with no statistical meaning.

Conclusions

Outcomes of this retrospective cohort study were in compliance with indications for ORH recommended by the National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines Version 1, 2021. However, LRH showed non-inferiority for patients with no prognostic risk factors compared with ORH.

Laparoscopic and Robotic Surgery for Endometrial and Cervical Cancer

Minimally invasive surgery (MIS) has many benefits, in the form of reduced postoperative morbidity, improved recovery and reduced inpatient stay. It is imperative, however, when new techniques are adopted, in the context of treating oncology patients, that the oncological efficacy and safety are established rigorously rather than assumed based on first principles. Here we have attempted to provide a comprehensive review of all the contentious and topical themes surrounding the use of MIS in the treatment of endometrial and cervix cancer following a thorough review of the literature. On the topic of endometrial cancer, we cover the role of laparoscopy in both early and advanced disease, together with the role and unique benefits of robotic surgery. The surgical challenge of patients with a raised body mass index and the frail and elderly are discussed and finally the role of sentinel lymph node assessment. For cervical cancer, the role of MIS for staging and primary treatment is covered, together with the interesting and highly specialist topics of fertility-sparing treatment, ovarian transposition and the live birth rate associated with this. We end with a discussion on the evidence surrounding the role of adjuvant hysterectomy following radical chemoradiation and pelvic exenteration for recurrent cervical cancer. MIS is the standard of care for endometrial cancer. The future of MIS for cervix cancer, however, remains uncertain. Current recommendations, based on the available evidence, are that the open approach should be considered the gold standard for the surgical management of early cervical cancer and that MIS should only be adopted in the context of research. Careful counselling of patients on the current evidence, discussing in detail the risks and benefits to enable them to make an informed choice, remains paramount.

Oncologic outcomes of minimally invasive versus open radical hysterectomy for early stage cervical carcinoma and tumor size <2 cm: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the oncologic outcomes of patients with early-stage cervical carcinoma and tumor size <2 cm who underwent open or minimally invasive radical hysterectomy.

METHODS

The Pubmed/Medline, Embase, and Web-of-Science databases were queried from inception to January 2021 (PROSPERO CRD 42020207971). Observational studies reporting progression-free survival and/or overall survival for patients who had open or minimally invasive radical hysterectomy for early-stage cervical carcinoma and tumor size <2 cm were selected. Level of statistical heterogeneity was evaluated with the I² statistic. A random-effects model was used to compare progression and overall survival between the two groups and HR with 95% confidence intervals were calculated with the Der Simonian and Laird approach. Risk of bias and quality of included studies was assessed with the Newcastle-Ottawa scale.

RESULTS

A total of 10 studies that met the inclusion criteria were included encompassing 4935 patients. Of these, 2394 (48.5%) patients had minimally invasive and 2541 (51.5%) patients had open radical hysterectomy; respectively. Patients who underwent minimally invasive hysterectomy had worse progression-free survival than those who had open surgery (HR 1.68, 95% CI 1.20, 2.36, I² 26%). Based on five studies, patients who had minimally invasive (n=1808) hysterectomy had a trend towards worse overall survival than those who had open surgery (n=1853) (HR 1.64, 95% CI 1.00 to 2.68, I² 15%).

CONCLUSION

Based on a systematic review of the literature and meta-analysis of studies that control for confounders, for patients with cervical cancer and tumor size <2 cm, minimally invasive radical hysterectomy was associated with worse progression-free survival than laparotomy.

Observational BGOG Study of the Results of Robot-assisted Laparoscopy in 166 Patients with FIGO 2009 Stage IA1-IB1 Cervical Cancer

STUDY OBJECTIVE

Two recent studies (the Laparoscopic Approach to Cervical Cancer [LACC] trial and a cohort study based on the National Cancer Database) raise the question of whether minimally invasive surgery (conventional and robot-assisted laparoscopy) is inferior to open abdominal surgery in early-stage cervical cancer. In the laparotomy group of the LACC trial, the low rates of recurrence and death are notable. The present study wants to elucidate the current situation of patients with early-stage cervical cancer treated with robot-assisted laparoscopy in hospitals of the Belgium and Luxembourg Gynaecological Oncology Group (BGOG).

DESIGN

This is a prospective follow-up study.

SETTING

The combined data obtained from different BGOG hospitals were analyzed regarding patients similar to those included in the LACC trial in terms of cervical cancer recurrence and survival.

PATIENTS

We included patients with stage IA1, IA2, or IB1 cervical cancer with a histologic subtype of squamous cell carcinoma, adenocarcinoma, or adenosquamous carcinoma.

INTERVENTIONS

All patients were treated with robot-assisted laparoscopy.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

The outcomes were disease-free and overall survival at 3 and 5 years after surgery. A total of 270 patients were included, and 166 were found suitable for analysis. The median age was 45 years. Most patients had International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics stage IB1 cervical cancer (84.9%) and squamous cell carcinoma as the histologic subtype (71.7%). The median follow-up time was 44 months, with a range of between 1 and 131 months. Twenty-one recurrences and 12 deaths were noted. Of the deaths, 8 were related to cervical cancer. Disease-free survival was 86% at 3 years (95% confidence interval [CI], 78.52-90.80) and 85% at 5 years (95% CI, 77.03-89.95). Overall survival was 96% at 3 years (95% CI, 90.11-98.22) and 91% at 5 years (95% CI, 82.54 95.17).

CONCLUSION

The results of this BGOG study show disease-free and overall survival rates after robot-assisted laparoscopy in early-stage cervical cancer that are at least similar to previous reported recurrence and survival data. We expect that the results of the Robot-assisted Approach to Cervical Cancer trial will elucidate the place of robot-assisted laparoscopy in early-stage cervical cancer.

Lymph-Vascular Space Invasion in Patients with Stages IA2-IIA2 Cervical Cancer Treated with Laparoscopic versus Open Radical Hysterectomy

Objective

To explore the relationship between laparoscopic radical hysterectomy (LRH) and cervical cancer lymph-vascular space invasion (LVSI) by comparing the prevalence of LVSI in cervical cancer patients who underwent LRH versus open radical hysterectomy (ORH).

Methods

The study participants were 1087 cervical cancer patients (FIGO 2009 stages IA2-IIA2) with pathologically confirmed with or without LVSI who underwent radical hysterectomy at Shengjing Hospital of China Medical University from 2013 through 2018. The patients were divided according to the type of surgical procedure into an LRH group (n=148) and an ORH group (n=939).

Results

In the LRH group, 31.76% of patients (47/148) had LVSI-positive tumors compared to 33.23% of patients (312/939) in the ORH group; the difference was not significant (p=0.724). No between-group differences in LVSI prevalence according to lymph node metastasis, interstitial infiltration depth, differentiation degree, and parametrial infiltration were found. However, the number of LVSI-positive patients whose cervical cancer lesions >4 cm (stage I B2 and II A2) was significantly higher in the LRH group than in the ORH group (Odds Ratio [OR] 0.333, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.157–0.706, p=0.005). The 3-Year disease-free survival (DFS) in the LRH group is lower than that in the ORH group (94.75% vs 97.27%), but there was no significance (P=0.187). Furthermore, the percentage of LVSI-positive tumors in patients with lymph node metastases was significantly higher than those without lymph node metastases (OR 2.897, 95% CI 2.129–3.942, p=0.000). The 3-Year DFS were 98.22% in the LVSI negative patients and 93.78% in the LVSI positive patients, the difference was significant (P=0.002).

Conclusion

A higher risk of lymph node metastasis and a lower 3-Year DFS was found in the LVSI-positive patients. In case of LVSI, it would be dangerous to treat patient in laparoscopy, especially in case of cervical cancer lesions >4cm.

The influence of learning curve of robot-assisted laparoscopy on oncological outcomes in early-stage cervical cancer: an observational cohort study

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the learning curve of robot-assisted laparoscopy in early-stage cervical cancer and quantify impact on oncological outcomes.

DESIGN

Observational cohort study.

SETTING

Tertiary referral centre with one surgical team.

POPULATION

All women with early-stage cervical cancer treated consecutively with robot-assisted laparoscopy between 2007 and 2017.

METHODS

With multivariate risk-adjusted cumulative sum analysis (RA-CUSUM), we assessed the learning curve of robot-assisted laparoscopy of a single surgical team based on cervical cancer recurrence. Subsequently, a survival analysis was conducted comparing oncological outcomes of women treated during different phases of the learning curve.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Surgical proficiency based on recurrence, survival rates in the different learning phases.

RESULTS

One hundred and sixty-five women with cervical cancer underwent robot-assisted laparoscopy, with a median follow up of 57 months (range 3-132 months). The RA-CUSUM analysis demonstrated two phases of the learning curve: a learning phase of 61 procedures (group 1) and an experienced phase representing the 104 procedures thereafter (group 2). The 5-year disease-free survival was 80.2% in group 1 and 91.1% in group 2 (P = 0.040). Both the 5-year disease-specific survival and overall survival significantly increased after the learning phase.

CONCLUSION

The learning phase of robot-assisted laparoscopy in early-stage cervical cancer in this institutional cohort is at least 61 procedures, with higher survival rates in the women treated thereafter. The learning curve of robot-assisted laparoscopy affects oncological outcomes and warrants more attention in the design of future studies.

TWEETABLE ABSTRACT

The learning curve of robot-assisted laparoscopy in early-stage cervical cancer affects oncological outcomes and warrants more attention.

Minimal-invasive or open approach for surgery of early cervical cancer: the treatment center matters

PURPOSE

The aim of the study was to compare recurrence-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS) of patients with early stage cervical cancer in dependence of surgical approach and treatment center.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A population-based cohort study including women with early stage IA1-IIB2 cervical cancer treated by radical hysterectomy between January 2010 and December 2015 was performed.

RESULTS

The median follow-up time was 5.6 years. After exclusions, 413 patients were eligible for analysis: 111 (26.9%) underwent minimal-invasive surgery (MIS) and 302 (73.1%) open surgery. Both treatment groups were well balanced regarding the clinical and pathological characteristics. The mean age of the patients was 51.0 years. MIS was associated with improved RFS and OS compared with the open surgery. The 5-year RFS rates were 89.2% in the MIS group and 73.4% in the open surgery group (p = 0.004). The 5-year OS rates were 93.7% in the MIS group and 81.8% in the open surgery group (p = 0.016). After adjustment for other prognostic covariates, the MIS was further associated with improved RFS (HR = 0.45, 95% CI 0.24-0.86; p = 0.015) but not with OS. Nevertheless, after adjustment for treatment center, the surgical approach was not associated with significant difference in RFS (HR = 0.61, 95% CI 0.31-1.19; p = 0.143). Overall survival of patients treated in university cancer centers was significantly increased compared to patients treated in non-university cancer centers. The treatment center remains a strong prognostic factor regarding RFS (HR = 0.49, 95% CI 0.28-0.83; p = 0.009) and OS (HR = 0.50, 95% CI 0.26-0.94; p = 0.031).

CONCLUSIONS

The treatment center but not the surgical approach was associated with the survival of patients treated with radical hysterectomy for early stage cervical cancer.

Survival After Minimally Invasive vs Open Radical Hysterectomy for Early-Stage Cervical Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Importance

Minimally invasive techniques are increasingly common in cancer surgery. A recent randomized clinical trial has brought into question the safety of minimally invasive radical hysterectomy for cervical cancer.

Objective

To quantify the risk of recurrence and death associated with minimally invasive vs open radical hysterectomy for early-stage cervical cancer reported in observational studies optimized to control for confounding.

Data Sources

Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid Embase, PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science (inception to March 26, 2020) performed in an academic medical setting.

Study Selection

In this systematic review and meta-analysis, observational studies were abstracted that used survival analyses to compare outcomes after minimally invasive (laparoscopic or robot-assisted) and open radical hysterectomy in patients with early-stage (International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics 2009 stage IA1-IIA) cervical cancer. Study quality was assessed with the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale and included studies with scores of at least 7 points that controlled for confounding by tumor size or stage.

Data Extraction and Synthesis

The Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) checklist was used to abstract data independently by multiple observers. Random-effects models were used to pool associations and to analyze the association between surgical approach and oncologic outcomes.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Risk of recurrence or death and risk of all-cause mortality.

Results

Forty-nine studies were identified, of which 15 were included in the meta-analysis. Of 9499 patients who underwent radical hysterectomy, 49% (n = 4684) received minimally invasive surgery; of these, 57% (n = 2675) received robot-assisted laparoscopy. There were 530 recurrences and 451 deaths reported. The pooled hazard of recurrence or death was 71% higher among patients who underwent minimally invasive radical hysterectomy compared with those who underwent open surgery (hazard ratio [HR], 1.71; 95% CI, 1.36-2.15; P < .001), and the hazard of death was 56% higher (HR, 1.56; 95% CI, 1.16-2.11; P = .004). Heterogeneity of associations was low to moderate. No association was found between the prevalence of robot-assisted surgery and the magnitude of association between minimally invasive radical hysterectomy and hazard of recurrence or death (2.0% increase in the HR for each 10-percentage point increase in prevalence of robot-assisted surgery [95% CI, -3.4% to 7.7%]) or all-cause mortality (3.7% increase in the HR for each 10-percentage point increase in prevalence of robot-assisted surgery [95% CI, -4.5% to 12.6%]).

Conclusions and Relevance

This systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies found that among patients undergoing radical hysterectomy for early-stage cervical cancer, minimally invasive radical hysterectomy was associated with an elevated risk of recurrence and death compared with open surgery.

Minimally Invasive Radical Hysterectomy for Cervical Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To compare recurrence rate, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival for early-stage cervical cancer after minimally invasive (MIS) vs abdominal radical hysterectomy.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Cochrane Library databases.

METHODS OF STUDY SELECTION

We identified studies from 1990 to 2020 that included women with stage I or higher cervical cancer treated with primary radical hysterectomy and compared recurrence and/or PFS and overall survival with MIS vs abdominal radical hysterectomy. (The review protocol was registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews: CRD4202173600).

TABULATION, INTEGRATION, AND RESULTS

We performed random-effects meta-analyses overall and by length of follow-up. Fifty articles on 40 cohort studies and 1 randomized controlled trial that included 22 593 women with cervical cancer met the inclusion criteria. Twenty percent of the studies had <36 months of follow-up, and 24% had more than 60 months of follow-up. The odds of PFS were worse for women undergoing MIS radical hysterectomy (odds ratio 1.54; 95% CI [confidence interval], 1.24-1.94; 14 studies). When limited to studies with longer follow-up, the odds of PFS were progressively worse with MIS radical hysterectomy (HR [hazard ratio] 1.48 for >36 months; 95% CI, 1.21-1.82; 10 studies; HR 1.69 for >48 months; 95% CI, 1.26-2.27; 5 studies; and HR 2.020 for >60 months; 95% CI, 1.36-3.001; 3 studies). For overall survival, the odds were not significantly different for MIS vs abdominal hysterectomy (odds ratio 0.94; 95% CI, 0.66-1.35; 14 studies) (HR 0.99 for >36 months; 95% CI, 0.66-1.48; 9 studies; HR 1.05 for >48 months; 95% CI, 0.57-1.94; 4 studies; and HR 1.35 for >60 months; 95% CI, 0.73-2.51; 3 studies).

CONCLUSION

In our meta-analysis of 50 studies, MIS radical hysterectomy was associated with worse PFS than open radical hysterectomy for early-stage cervical cancer. The emergence of this finding with longer follow-up highlights the importance of long-term, high-quality studies to guide cancer and surgical treatments.

Risk Factors for Recurrence after Robot-Assisted Radical Hysterectomy for Early-Stage Cervical Cancer: A Multicenter Retrospective Study

Simple Summary

In 239 women with early-stage cervical cancer (≤IB1 or IIA1, FIGO 2009) undergoing robot-assisted radical hysterectomy in Spanish and Portuguese centers between 2009 and 2018, the overall survival rate was 94.1% after a median follow-up of 51 months. Recurrence was diagnosed in 26 patients. In the multivariate analysis, independent risk factors for recurrence were tumor size > 20 mm, adenocarcinoma as histological type, presence of positive pelvic lymph nodes, tumor grades 2 and 3, and not performing sentinel lymph node biopsy. The present oncological and surgical results surpassed the target of quality indicators in cervical cancer proposed by the European Society of Gynecology Oncology. When selecting a robot-assisted surgical approach to perform radical hysterectomy in the surgical treatment of primary early-stage cervical cancer, it is recommended to take into account the tumor grade and histological type, results of the sentinel lymph node biopsy, and the size of the tumor.

Abstract

This retrospective analysis aimed to assess the risk factors for recurrence in patients diagnosed with early-stage cervical cancer (≤IB1 or IIA1, FIGO 2009) undergoing robot-assisted radical hysterectomy in Spain and Portugal between 2009 and 2018. A second primary objective was to audit the oncological outcomes according to quality indicators (QI) proposed by the European Society of Gynecology Oncology (ESGO). The study population included 239 women. After a median follow-up of 51 months, recurrence occurred in 26 patients (10.9%). Independent factors for recurrence were clinical tumor size > 20 mm (hazard ratio (HR) 2.37), adenocarcinoma as histological type (HR 2.51), positive pelvic lymph nodes (HR 4.83), tumor grade 2 (HR 4.99), tumor grade 3 (HR 8.06), and having not performed sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) (HR 4.08). All 5 QI selected were surpassed by our results. In patients with early-stage cervical cancer undergoing robotic radical hysterectomy, clinicians should be aware that tumor grade 2 and 3, tumor size > 20 mm, adenocarcinoma, positive pelvic nodes, and lack of performance of SLNB are risk factors for recurrence. Fulfillment of QI targets of the ESGO might be considered as an objective oncological outcome indicator supporting the minimally invasive approach for early-stage cervical cancer treatment.

The Landmark Series: Minimally Invasive Surgery for Cervical Cancer

Cervical cancer incidence and mortality have declined in developed countries during the past few decades as a result of screening programs and vaccination. However, it remains a significant cause of cancer-related mortality in young women. Early-stage cervical cancer, defined as disease limited to the cervix, has traditionally been treated with abdominal radical hysterectomy via laparotomy. Although most early-stage cervical cancers can be cured with open radical hysterectomy, the morbidity associated with open radical hysterectomy is significant compared with simple extrafascial hysterectomy. Since the early 1990s, minimally invasive surgery has been explored for the treatment of this disease, with the goal of minimizing the morbidity associated with open surgery, as reported for endometrial cancer surgery. This report reviews the landmark studies describing and evaluating minimally invasive surgery in the treatment of patients with early-stage cervical cancer.

Impact of the Learning Curve on the Survival of Abdominal or Minimally Invasive Radical Hysterectomy for Early-Stage Cervical Cancer

Purpose

The objective of this study was to define the learning curve required to attain satisfactory oncologic outcomes of cervical cancer patients who were undergoing open or minimally invasive surgery for radical hysterectomy, and to analyze the correlation between the learning curve and tumor size.

Materials and Methods

Cervical cancer patients (stage IA–IIA) who underwent open radical hysterectomy (n=280) or minimal invasive radical hysterectomy (n=282) were retrospectively reviewed. The learning curve was evaluated using cumulative sum of 5-year recurrence rates. Survival outcomes were analyzed based on the operation period (“learning period,” P1 vs. “skilled period,” P2), operation mode, and tumor size.

Results

The 5-year disease-free and overall survival rates between open and minimally invasive groups were 91.8% and 89.0% (p=0.098) and 96.1% and 97.2% (p=0.944), respectively. The number of surgeries for learning period was 30 and 60 in open and minimally invasive group, respectively. P2 had better 5-year disease-free survival than P1 after adjusting for risk factors (hazard ratio, 0.392; 95% confidence interval, 0.210 to 0.734; p=0.003). All patients with tumors < 2 cm had similar 5-year disease-free survival regardless of operation mode or learning curve. Minimally invasive group presented lower survival rates than open group when tumors ≥ 2 cm in P2. Preoperative conization improved disease-free survival in patients with tumors ≥ 2 cm, especially in minimally invasive group.

Conclusion

Minimally invasive radical hysterectomy required more cases than open group to achieve acceptable 5-year disease-free survival. When tumors ≥ 2 cm, the surgeon’s proficiency affected survival outcomes in both groups.

Updates and Controversies of Robotic-Assisted Surgery in Gynecologic Surgery

minimally invasive surgery (MIS) is the standard approach to performance of several gynecologic procedures, including hysterectomy, gynecologic cancer staging procedures, myomectomy, pelvic organ prolapse repair, and select adnexal procedures. Robotic-assisted surgery, a computer-based MIS approach, has been adopted widely in the United States and several other countries. Robotics may offer technological and ergonomic benefits that overcome limitations associated with conventional laparoscopy; however, it is not clear that reported claims of superiority translate into improved gynecologic patient outcomes compared with other MIS approaches. This review critically appraises the evolving role, benefits, limitations, and controversies of robotic-assisted surgery utilization in benign and oncologic gynecology settings.

Survival outcomes in patients with cervical cancer treated with open versus robotic radical hysterectomy: Our surgical pathology interrogation

OBJECTIVE

To compare the survival outcomes and surgical radicality between women who underwent open versus robotic radical hysterectomy (RH) for early cervical cancer.

METHODS

In this institutional retrospective study, patients with clinical stage IA2- IIA (FIGO 2009) squamous cell, adenocarcinoma and adenosquamous carcinoma of the cervix who underwent either open or robotic RH between 2000 and 2017 were identified. Parametrial width and vaginal length were re-measured from pathology slides. An inverse propensity score weighting model was used to adjust selection bias.

RESULTS

A total of 333 patients were included (181 open, 152 robotic). The median follow-up time was 130 months for the open group and 53 months for the robotic group. There were 31 (17.1%) recurrences in the open and 21 (13.8%) in the robotic group. The 5-year progression-free survival (PFS) for the robotic and open group were 79.0% and 90.5%, respectively (HR 2.37, 95% CI 1.40-4.02). Five-year overall survival (OS) were 85.8% and 95.3%, respectively (HR 3.17, 95% CI 1.76-5.70). The mean parametrial width was similar between the open and robotic groups (2.5 vs 2.4 cm, p = 0.99). Unique recurrences (38.1%, 8/21) were noted in the robotic group: 2 port-site, 4 peritoneal, and 2 carcinomatosis. The time to vaginal recurrence was shorter in the robotic group than the open group (p = 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Patients who underwent robotic RH had inferior PFS and OS compared to open surgery. Surgical radicality according to pathology measurements was similar between the two approaches.

Oncologic Outcomes of Robotic Radical Hysterectomy (RRH) for Patients with Early-Stage Cervical Cancer: Experience at a Referral Cancer Center

PURPOSE

To evaluate oncologic outcomes of early stage cervical cancer patients who underwent robotic radical hysterectomy (RRH) in a referral center, a retrospective analysis was performed.

METHODS

From January 2010 to December 2018, medical records of stage IA2-IIA1 cervical cancer patients, who underwent radical hysterectomy at our institute, were retrospectively reviewed. We focused our analysis on those who underwent RRH.

RESULTS

A total of 198 patients were included in the final analysis. Median follow up was 52 months. At last follow-up, 188 (94.9%) women were disease-free, 9 (4.5%) had died, and 1 (0.5%) was alive with recurrent disease. At 4.5 years, PFS was 93.1% (SE ± 2.1) and OS was 95.1% (SE ± 1.8). Stratified by tumor size, PFS for tumor < 2 cm versus tumor ≥ 2 cm was statistically different (96.8% ± 2.3 and 87.9% ± 4.1 respectively, p = 0.01), as well as OS (100% and 89.8% ± 40 respectively, p = 0.01).Stratified by evidence of tumor at time of robotic surgery, PFS was statistically different in women with no residual tumor after conisation versus those with residual disease (100% ± 2.5 and 90.8% ± 2.8 respectively, p = 0.04). A recurrence occurred in 11 patients (5.6%).

CONCLUSIONS

Based on our results, we could speculate that robotic approach, along with some technical precautions to avoid spillage, might be safe as primary treatment of early-stage cervical cancer, especially for tumor < 2 cm and in case of no evidence of disease at time of radical hysterectomy after previous conisation.

Efficacy of different surgical approaches on survival outcomes in patients with early-stage cervical cancer: protocol for a multicentre longitudinal study in China

INTRODUCTION

Recent studies have revealed that the oncological survival outcomes of minimally invasive radical hysterectomy (MIRH) are inferior to those of abdominal radical hysterectomy (ARH) in early-stage cervical cancer, but the potential reasons are unclear.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

Each expert from 28 study centres participating in a previously reported randomised controlled trial (NCT03739944) will provide successive eligible records of at least 100 patients who accepted radical hysterectomy for early-stage cervical cancer between 1 January 2009 and 31 December 2015. Inclusion criteria consist of a definite pathological evaluation of stages IA1 (with positive lymphovascular space invasion), IA2 and IB1 according to the International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics 2009 staging system and a histological subtype of squamous cell carcinoma, adenocarcinoma or adenosquamous carcinoma. The primary endpoint is 5-year disease-free survival between the MIRH and ARH groups. The secondary endpoints include the MIRH learning curves of participating surgeons, 5-year overall survival between the MIRH and ARH groups, survival outcomes according to surgical chronology, surgical outcomes and sites of recurrence and potential risk factors that affect survival outcomes. A subgroup analysis in patients with tumour diameter less than 2 cm will follow the similar flow diagram.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This study has been approved by the Institutional Review Board of Peking Union Medical College Hospital (registration no. JS-1711), and is also filed on record by all other 27 centres. The results will be disseminated through community events and peer-reviewed journals.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT03738969.

Trends and survival outcomes of robotic, laparoscopic, and open surgery for stage II uterine cancer

INTRODUCTION

A recent randomized clinical trial showed that minimally invasive surgery led to poorer survival compared with open surgery in early stage cervical cancer. We determined the trends in adoption of minimally invasive surgery and 5-year overall survival outcomes after open, laparoscopic-assisted, and robotic-assisted hysterectomy for stage II uterine cancer with cervical stromal involvement.

METHODS

Data for patients with stage II uterine cancer were acquired from the National Cancer Database from 2010 to 2015. χ² testing, Kaplan-Meier methods, and Cox models were used for statistical analyses.

RESULTS

Of 2949 patients, 44.3% underwent open hysterectomy, 13.9% underwent laparoscopic hysterectomy, and 41.8% underwent robotic hysterectomy. The proportion of robotic cases increased from 26.8% in 2010 to 48.3% in 2015 (annual percent change 10.1%), with a decrease in open hysterectomy from 63.3% to 34.3% (annual percent change -12.5%). The overall 5-year survival was 77.6% in robotic, 76.8% in laparoscopic, and 72.5% in open hysterectomy (p=0.045); however, after adjusting for known prognostic factors, robotic (HR 1.00, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.21; p=0.97) and laparoscopic hysterectomy (HR 1.09, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.44; p=0.54) did not portend for improved survival compared with open hysterectomy. Black women (HR 1.59, 95% CI 1.25 to 2.02; p<0.001) and individuals with co-morbidities (HR 1.45, 95% CI 1.21 to 1.75, p<0.001) had worse adjusted survival and the highest rates of open hysterectomy.

CONCLUSION

The use of minimally invasive surgery for stage II uterine cancer has increased over time, with comparable adjusted 5-year survival after robotic or laparoscopic hysterectomy compared with open hysterectomy. Black women and those with co-morbidities had lowest rates of minimally invasive surgery and the poorest adjusted survival.