Cargando…

Comparison between laparoscopic and abdominal radical hysterectomy for stage IB1 and tumor size <2 cm cervical cancer with visible or invisible tumors: a multicentre retrospective study

OBJECTIVE: To compare 5-year disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) rates of laparoscopic radical hysterectomy (LRH) and abdominal radical hysterectomy (ARH) for stage IB1 and tumor size <2 cm with visible or invisible tumors. METHODS: We retrospectively compared the oncological ou...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Li, Pengfei, Chen, Lan, Ni, Yan, Liu, Jiaqi, Li, Donglin, Guo, Jianxin, Liu, Zhihua, Jin, Shuangling, Xu, Yan, Li, Zhiqiang, Wang, Lu, Bin, Xiaonong, Lang, Jinghe, Liu, Ping, Chen, Chunlin
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Asian Society of Gynecologic Oncology; Korean Society of Gynecologic Oncology; Japan Society of Gynecologic Oncology 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7930457/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33470062
http://dx.doi.org/10.3802/jgo.2021.32.e17
Descripción
Sumario:OBJECTIVE: To compare 5-year disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) rates of laparoscopic radical hysterectomy (LRH) and abdominal radical hysterectomy (ARH) for stage IB1 and tumor size <2 cm with visible or invisible tumors. METHODS: We retrospectively compared the oncological outcomes of 1,484 cervical cancer patients with IB1 and tumor size <2 cm on final pathology, who received ARH (n=899) or LRH (n=585) between January 2004 and December 2016. Patients were divided into visible tumor subgroup (ARH: n=668, LRH: n=444) and invisible tumor subgroup (ARH: n=231, LRH: n=141) according to tumor type. RESULTS: LRH and ARH showed similar 5-year DFS and OS rates (93.3% vs. 93.1%, p=0.997; 96.2% vs. 97.5%, p=0.351) in total study population. LRH was not associated with worse 5-year DFS rate (hazard ratio [HR]=0.96; 95% confidence interval [CI]=0.58–1.58; p=0.871) or OS rate (HR=1.37; 95% CI=0.65–2.89; p=0.409) by multivariable analysis. In the visible tumor subgroups, LRH and ARH showed similar 5-year DFS and OS rates (91.9% vs. 91.9%, p=0.933; 95.0% vs. 96.9%, p=0.276), and LRH was not associated with worse 5-year DFS or OS rate (p=0.804, p=0.324). In the invisible tumor subgroups, LRH and ARH also showed similar 5-year DFS and OS rates (97.3% vs. 97.1%, p=0.815; 100% vs. 99.5%, p=0.449), and LRH was not associated with worse 5-year DFS rate (p=0.723). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with stage IB1 and tumor size <2 cm, whether the tumor is visible or not, the oncological outcomes of LRH and ARH among cervical cancer patients are comparable. This suggests that LRH may be suitable for stage IB1 and tumor size <2 cm with visible or invisible tumors. TRIAL REGISTRATION: International Clinical Trials Registry Platform Identifier: CHiCTR180017778