Cargando…

Comparison of the Oncological Outcomes Between Robot-Assisted and Abdominal Radical Hysterectomy for Cervical Cancer Based on the New FIGO 2018 Staging System: A Multicentre Retrospective Study

OBJECTIVE: To compare the 3-year oncological outcomes of robot-assisted radical hysterectomy (RRH) and abdominal radical hysterectomy (ARH) for cervical cancer. METHODS: Based on the clinical diagnosis and treatment for cervical cancer in the China database, patients with FIGO 2018 stage IA with lym...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Li, Pengfei, Zhan, Xuemei, Lv, Chifei, Lin, Zhong, Yang, Ying, Wang, Wuliang, Wang, Shaoguang, Hao, Min, Zhu, Bin, Bin, Xiaonong, Lang, Jinghe, Liu, Ping, Chen, Chunlin
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9280150/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35847917
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2022.879569
_version_ 1784746572159909888
author Li, Pengfei
Zhan, Xuemei
Lv, Chifei
Lin, Zhong
Yang, Ying
Wang, Wuliang
Wang, Shaoguang
Hao, Min
Zhu, Bin
Bin, Xiaonong
Lang, Jinghe
Liu, Ping
Chen, Chunlin
author_facet Li, Pengfei
Zhan, Xuemei
Lv, Chifei
Lin, Zhong
Yang, Ying
Wang, Wuliang
Wang, Shaoguang
Hao, Min
Zhu, Bin
Bin, Xiaonong
Lang, Jinghe
Liu, Ping
Chen, Chunlin
author_sort Li, Pengfei
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: To compare the 3-year oncological outcomes of robot-assisted radical hysterectomy (RRH) and abdominal radical hysterectomy (ARH) for cervical cancer. METHODS: Based on the clinical diagnosis and treatment for cervical cancer in the China database, patients with FIGO 2018 stage IA with lymphovascular space invasion (LVSI)-IB2 cervical cancer disease who underwent RRH and ARH from 2004 to 2018 were included. Kaplan–Meier survival analysis was used to compare the 3-year overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) rate between patients receiving RRH and those receiving ARH. The Cox proportional hazards model and propensity score matching were used to estimate the surgical approach-specific survival. RESULTS: A total of 1,137 patients with cervical cancer were enrolled in this study, including the RRH group (n = 468) and the ARH group (n = 669). The median follow-up time was 45 months (RRH group vs. ARH group: 24 vs. 60 months). Among the overall study population, there was no significant difference in 3-year OS and DFS between the RRH group and the ARH group (OS: 95.8% vs. 97.6% p = 0.244). The Cox proportional hazards analysis showed that RRH was not an independent risk factor for 3-year OS (HR: 1.394, 95% CI: 0.552–3.523, p = 0.482). However, RRH was an independent risk factor for 3-year DFS (HR: 1.985, 95% CI: 1.078–3.655 p = 0.028). After 1:1 propensity score matching, there was no significant difference in 3-year OS between the RRH group and the ARH group (96.6% vs. 98.0%, p = 0.470); however, the 3-year DFS of the RRH group was lower than that of the ARH group (91.0% vs. 96.1%, p = 0.025). The Cox proportional hazards analysis revealed that RRH was not an independent risk factor for 3-year OS (HR: 1.622, 95% CI: 0.449–5.860 p = 0.461), but RRH was an independent risk factor for 3-year DFS (HR: 2.498, 95% CI: 1.123–5.557 p = 0.025). CONCLUSION: Among patients with stage I A1 (LVSI +)-I B2 cervical cancer based on the FIGO 2018 staging system, RRH has a lower 3-year DFS than ARH, suggesting that RRH may not be suitable for early cervical cancer patients.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9280150
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-92801502022-07-15 Comparison of the Oncological Outcomes Between Robot-Assisted and Abdominal Radical Hysterectomy for Cervical Cancer Based on the New FIGO 2018 Staging System: A Multicentre Retrospective Study Li, Pengfei Zhan, Xuemei Lv, Chifei Lin, Zhong Yang, Ying Wang, Wuliang Wang, Shaoguang Hao, Min Zhu, Bin Bin, Xiaonong Lang, Jinghe Liu, Ping Chen, Chunlin Front Oncol Oncology OBJECTIVE: To compare the 3-year oncological outcomes of robot-assisted radical hysterectomy (RRH) and abdominal radical hysterectomy (ARH) for cervical cancer. METHODS: Based on the clinical diagnosis and treatment for cervical cancer in the China database, patients with FIGO 2018 stage IA with lymphovascular space invasion (LVSI)-IB2 cervical cancer disease who underwent RRH and ARH from 2004 to 2018 were included. Kaplan–Meier survival analysis was used to compare the 3-year overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) rate between patients receiving RRH and those receiving ARH. The Cox proportional hazards model and propensity score matching were used to estimate the surgical approach-specific survival. RESULTS: A total of 1,137 patients with cervical cancer were enrolled in this study, including the RRH group (n = 468) and the ARH group (n = 669). The median follow-up time was 45 months (RRH group vs. ARH group: 24 vs. 60 months). Among the overall study population, there was no significant difference in 3-year OS and DFS between the RRH group and the ARH group (OS: 95.8% vs. 97.6% p = 0.244). The Cox proportional hazards analysis showed that RRH was not an independent risk factor for 3-year OS (HR: 1.394, 95% CI: 0.552–3.523, p = 0.482). However, RRH was an independent risk factor for 3-year DFS (HR: 1.985, 95% CI: 1.078–3.655 p = 0.028). After 1:1 propensity score matching, there was no significant difference in 3-year OS between the RRH group and the ARH group (96.6% vs. 98.0%, p = 0.470); however, the 3-year DFS of the RRH group was lower than that of the ARH group (91.0% vs. 96.1%, p = 0.025). The Cox proportional hazards analysis revealed that RRH was not an independent risk factor for 3-year OS (HR: 1.622, 95% CI: 0.449–5.860 p = 0.461), but RRH was an independent risk factor for 3-year DFS (HR: 2.498, 95% CI: 1.123–5.557 p = 0.025). CONCLUSION: Among patients with stage I A1 (LVSI +)-I B2 cervical cancer based on the FIGO 2018 staging system, RRH has a lower 3-year DFS than ARH, suggesting that RRH may not be suitable for early cervical cancer patients. Frontiers Media S.A. 2022-06-30 /pmc/articles/PMC9280150/ /pubmed/35847917 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2022.879569 Text en Copyright © 2022 Li, Zhan, Lv, Lin, Yang, Wang, Wang, Hao, Zhu, Bin, Lang, Liu and Chen https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
spellingShingle Oncology
Li, Pengfei
Zhan, Xuemei
Lv, Chifei
Lin, Zhong
Yang, Ying
Wang, Wuliang
Wang, Shaoguang
Hao, Min
Zhu, Bin
Bin, Xiaonong
Lang, Jinghe
Liu, Ping
Chen, Chunlin
Comparison of the Oncological Outcomes Between Robot-Assisted and Abdominal Radical Hysterectomy for Cervical Cancer Based on the New FIGO 2018 Staging System: A Multicentre Retrospective Study
title Comparison of the Oncological Outcomes Between Robot-Assisted and Abdominal Radical Hysterectomy for Cervical Cancer Based on the New FIGO 2018 Staging System: A Multicentre Retrospective Study
title_full Comparison of the Oncological Outcomes Between Robot-Assisted and Abdominal Radical Hysterectomy for Cervical Cancer Based on the New FIGO 2018 Staging System: A Multicentre Retrospective Study
title_fullStr Comparison of the Oncological Outcomes Between Robot-Assisted and Abdominal Radical Hysterectomy for Cervical Cancer Based on the New FIGO 2018 Staging System: A Multicentre Retrospective Study
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of the Oncological Outcomes Between Robot-Assisted and Abdominal Radical Hysterectomy for Cervical Cancer Based on the New FIGO 2018 Staging System: A Multicentre Retrospective Study
title_short Comparison of the Oncological Outcomes Between Robot-Assisted and Abdominal Radical Hysterectomy for Cervical Cancer Based on the New FIGO 2018 Staging System: A Multicentre Retrospective Study
title_sort comparison of the oncological outcomes between robot-assisted and abdominal radical hysterectomy for cervical cancer based on the new figo 2018 staging system: a multicentre retrospective study
topic Oncology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9280150/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35847917
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2022.879569
work_keys_str_mv AT lipengfei comparisonoftheoncologicaloutcomesbetweenrobotassistedandabdominalradicalhysterectomyforcervicalcancerbasedonthenewfigo2018stagingsystemamulticentreretrospectivestudy
AT zhanxuemei comparisonoftheoncologicaloutcomesbetweenrobotassistedandabdominalradicalhysterectomyforcervicalcancerbasedonthenewfigo2018stagingsystemamulticentreretrospectivestudy
AT lvchifei comparisonoftheoncologicaloutcomesbetweenrobotassistedandabdominalradicalhysterectomyforcervicalcancerbasedonthenewfigo2018stagingsystemamulticentreretrospectivestudy
AT linzhong comparisonoftheoncologicaloutcomesbetweenrobotassistedandabdominalradicalhysterectomyforcervicalcancerbasedonthenewfigo2018stagingsystemamulticentreretrospectivestudy
AT yangying comparisonoftheoncologicaloutcomesbetweenrobotassistedandabdominalradicalhysterectomyforcervicalcancerbasedonthenewfigo2018stagingsystemamulticentreretrospectivestudy
AT wangwuliang comparisonoftheoncologicaloutcomesbetweenrobotassistedandabdominalradicalhysterectomyforcervicalcancerbasedonthenewfigo2018stagingsystemamulticentreretrospectivestudy
AT wangshaoguang comparisonoftheoncologicaloutcomesbetweenrobotassistedandabdominalradicalhysterectomyforcervicalcancerbasedonthenewfigo2018stagingsystemamulticentreretrospectivestudy
AT haomin comparisonoftheoncologicaloutcomesbetweenrobotassistedandabdominalradicalhysterectomyforcervicalcancerbasedonthenewfigo2018stagingsystemamulticentreretrospectivestudy
AT zhubin comparisonoftheoncologicaloutcomesbetweenrobotassistedandabdominalradicalhysterectomyforcervicalcancerbasedonthenewfigo2018stagingsystemamulticentreretrospectivestudy
AT binxiaonong comparisonoftheoncologicaloutcomesbetweenrobotassistedandabdominalradicalhysterectomyforcervicalcancerbasedonthenewfigo2018stagingsystemamulticentreretrospectivestudy
AT langjinghe comparisonoftheoncologicaloutcomesbetweenrobotassistedandabdominalradicalhysterectomyforcervicalcancerbasedonthenewfigo2018stagingsystemamulticentreretrospectivestudy
AT liuping comparisonoftheoncologicaloutcomesbetweenrobotassistedandabdominalradicalhysterectomyforcervicalcancerbasedonthenewfigo2018stagingsystemamulticentreretrospectivestudy
AT chenchunlin comparisonoftheoncologicaloutcomesbetweenrobotassistedandabdominalradicalhysterectomyforcervicalcancerbasedonthenewfigo2018stagingsystemamulticentreretrospectivestudy