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...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
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 |