Cargando…
Comparison of Prognosis between Minimally Invasive and Abdominal Radical Hysterectomy for Patients with Early-Stage Cervical Cancer
Minimally invasive surgery (MIS) is performed to treat cervical cancer patients; however, a recent study showed that MIS was associated with higher recurrence and death rate compared with abdominal radical hysterectomy (ARH). In the current study, the prognosis of patients with early-stage cervical...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
MDPI
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9026697/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35448159 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/curroncol29040185 |
_version_ | 1784691177392439296 |
---|---|
author | Tanaka, Tomohito Ueda, Shoko Miyamoto, Shunsuke Hashida, Sousuke Terada, Shinichi Konishi, Hiromi Kogata, Yuhei Taniguchi, Kohei Komura, Kazumasa Ohmichi, Masahide |
author_facet | Tanaka, Tomohito Ueda, Shoko Miyamoto, Shunsuke Hashida, Sousuke Terada, Shinichi Konishi, Hiromi Kogata, Yuhei Taniguchi, Kohei Komura, Kazumasa Ohmichi, Masahide |
author_sort | Tanaka, Tomohito |
collection | PubMed |
description | Minimally invasive surgery (MIS) is performed to treat cervical cancer patients; however, a recent study showed that MIS was associated with higher recurrence and death rate compared with abdominal radical hysterectomy (ARH). In the current study, the prognosis of patients with early-stage cervical cancer who underwent MIS with vaginal closure or ARH was evaluated. One hundred and eighty-two patients underwent radical hysterectomy for cervical cancer with stage of IA2, IB1, and IIA1. MIS was performed by laparoscopy or a robot using the vaginal closure method. Disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) were evaluated between the groups. Among the patients, 67 underwent MIS and 115 underwent ARH. The recurrence rate was 4.5% in MIS patients and 3.5% in ARH patients with a median follow-up (interquartile range) of 36 (18–60) and 78 (48–102) months, respectively. DFS and OS were not different between the groups (3y-DFS, 95.3% vs. 96.1%, p = 0.6; 3y-OS, 100% vs. 100%, p = 0.06). In early-stage cervical cancer patients, MIS with vaginal closure did not increase the risk for recurrence or death. Surgical techniques and procedures to avoid spillage of tumor cells could be important for a better prognosis. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9026697 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | MDPI |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-90266972022-04-23 Comparison of Prognosis between Minimally Invasive and Abdominal Radical Hysterectomy for Patients with Early-Stage Cervical Cancer Tanaka, Tomohito Ueda, Shoko Miyamoto, Shunsuke Hashida, Sousuke Terada, Shinichi Konishi, Hiromi Kogata, Yuhei Taniguchi, Kohei Komura, Kazumasa Ohmichi, Masahide Curr Oncol Article Minimally invasive surgery (MIS) is performed to treat cervical cancer patients; however, a recent study showed that MIS was associated with higher recurrence and death rate compared with abdominal radical hysterectomy (ARH). In the current study, the prognosis of patients with early-stage cervical cancer who underwent MIS with vaginal closure or ARH was evaluated. One hundred and eighty-two patients underwent radical hysterectomy for cervical cancer with stage of IA2, IB1, and IIA1. MIS was performed by laparoscopy or a robot using the vaginal closure method. Disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) were evaluated between the groups. Among the patients, 67 underwent MIS and 115 underwent ARH. The recurrence rate was 4.5% in MIS patients and 3.5% in ARH patients with a median follow-up (interquartile range) of 36 (18–60) and 78 (48–102) months, respectively. DFS and OS were not different between the groups (3y-DFS, 95.3% vs. 96.1%, p = 0.6; 3y-OS, 100% vs. 100%, p = 0.06). In early-stage cervical cancer patients, MIS with vaginal closure did not increase the risk for recurrence or death. Surgical techniques and procedures to avoid spillage of tumor cells could be important for a better prognosis. MDPI 2022-03-24 /pmc/articles/PMC9026697/ /pubmed/35448159 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/curroncol29040185 Text en © 2022 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Article Tanaka, Tomohito Ueda, Shoko Miyamoto, Shunsuke Hashida, Sousuke Terada, Shinichi Konishi, Hiromi Kogata, Yuhei Taniguchi, Kohei Komura, Kazumasa Ohmichi, Masahide Comparison of Prognosis between Minimally Invasive and Abdominal Radical Hysterectomy for Patients with Early-Stage Cervical Cancer |
title | Comparison of Prognosis between Minimally Invasive and Abdominal Radical Hysterectomy for Patients with Early-Stage Cervical Cancer |
title_full | Comparison of Prognosis between Minimally Invasive and Abdominal Radical Hysterectomy for Patients with Early-Stage Cervical Cancer |
title_fullStr | Comparison of Prognosis between Minimally Invasive and Abdominal Radical Hysterectomy for Patients with Early-Stage Cervical Cancer |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparison of Prognosis between Minimally Invasive and Abdominal Radical Hysterectomy for Patients with Early-Stage Cervical Cancer |
title_short | Comparison of Prognosis between Minimally Invasive and Abdominal Radical Hysterectomy for Patients with Early-Stage Cervical Cancer |
title_sort | comparison of prognosis between minimally invasive and abdominal radical hysterectomy for patients with early-stage cervical cancer |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9026697/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35448159 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/curroncol29040185 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT tanakatomohito comparisonofprognosisbetweenminimallyinvasiveandabdominalradicalhysterectomyforpatientswithearlystagecervicalcancer AT uedashoko comparisonofprognosisbetweenminimallyinvasiveandabdominalradicalhysterectomyforpatientswithearlystagecervicalcancer AT miyamotoshunsuke comparisonofprognosisbetweenminimallyinvasiveandabdominalradicalhysterectomyforpatientswithearlystagecervicalcancer AT hashidasousuke comparisonofprognosisbetweenminimallyinvasiveandabdominalradicalhysterectomyforpatientswithearlystagecervicalcancer AT teradashinichi comparisonofprognosisbetweenminimallyinvasiveandabdominalradicalhysterectomyforpatientswithearlystagecervicalcancer AT konishihiromi comparisonofprognosisbetweenminimallyinvasiveandabdominalradicalhysterectomyforpatientswithearlystagecervicalcancer AT kogatayuhei comparisonofprognosisbetweenminimallyinvasiveandabdominalradicalhysterectomyforpatientswithearlystagecervicalcancer AT taniguchikohei comparisonofprognosisbetweenminimallyinvasiveandabdominalradicalhysterectomyforpatientswithearlystagecervicalcancer AT komurakazumasa comparisonofprognosisbetweenminimallyinvasiveandabdominalradicalhysterectomyforpatientswithearlystagecervicalcancer AT ohmichimasahide comparisonofprognosisbetweenminimallyinvasiveandabdominalradicalhysterectomyforpatientswithearlystagecervicalcancer |