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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Tanaka, Tomohito, Ueda, Shoko, Miyamoto, Shunsuke, Hashida, Sousuke, Terada, Shinichi, Konishi, Hiromi, Kogata, Yuhei, Taniguchi, Kohei, Komura, Kazumasa, Ohmichi, Masahide
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