Cargando…

Impact of the care provided by gynecologic oncologists on outcomes of cervical cancer patients treated with radical hysterectomy

For many malignant diseases, specialized care has been reported to be associated with better outcomes. The purpose of this study is to investigate the influence of gynecologic oncologists on treatment outcomes for cervical cancer patients treated by radical hysterectomy. Records of patients who rece...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Wu, Miao-fang, Li, Jing, Lu, Huai-wu, Wang, Li-juan, Zhang, Bing-zhong, Lin, Zhong-qiu
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Dove Medical Press 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4792213/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27022291
http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/OTT.S99874
Descripción
Sumario:For many malignant diseases, specialized care has been reported to be associated with better outcomes. The purpose of this study is to investigate the influence of gynecologic oncologists on treatment outcomes for cervical cancer patients treated by radical hysterectomy. Records of patients who received radical hysterectomy between January 2005 and June 2010 were reviewed. Perioperative morbidity, recurrence-free survival, and cancer-specific survival were assessed. Cox regression model was used to evaluate gynecologic oncologists as an independent predictor of survival. A total of 839 patients were included. Of these patients, 553 were treated by gynecologic oncologists, while 286 were treated by other subspecialties. With regard to operative outcomes, significant differences in favor of operation by gynecologic oncologists were found in number of patients receiving para-aortic node sampling and dissection (P=0.038), compliance with surgical guidelines (P=0.003), operative time (P<0.0001), estimated blood loss (P<0.0001), transfusion rate (P=0.046), number of removed nodes (P=0.033), and incidences of ureteric injury (P=0.027), cystotomy (P=0.038), and fistula formation (P=0.002). Patients who were operated on by gynecologic oncologists had longer recurrence-free survival (P=0.001; hazard ratio [HR] =0.64; 95% confidence interval [CI] [0.48, 0.84]) and cancer-specific survival (P=0.005; HR=0.64; 95% CI [0.47, 0.87]), and this association remained significant in patients with locally advanced disease. Care by gynecologic oncologists was an independent predictor for improved recurrence-free survival (P<0.0001; HR=0.57; 95% CI [0.42, 0.76]) and cancer-specific survival (P=0.001; HR=0.58; 95% CI [0.42, 0.81]), which was still significant among patients with locally advanced cancer. Given the results, we believe for cervical cancer patients receiving radical hysterectomy, operation by gynecologic oncologists results in significantly improved surgical and survival outcomes. The importance of the subspecialty of a gynecologist for cervical cancer patients should be addressed in clinical practice, especially for those in developing countries.