Radical trachelectomy in early-stage cervical cancer: A comparison of laparotomy and minimally invasive surgery

被引:73
|
作者
Vieira, Marcelo A. [1 ]
Rendon, Gabriel J. [2 ]
Munsell, Mark [3 ]
Echeverri, Lina [2 ]
Frumovitz, Michael [4 ]
Schmeler, Kathleen M. [4 ]
Pareja, Rene [2 ]
Escobar, Pedro F. [4 ]
dos Reis, Ricardo [1 ]
Ramirez, Pedro T. [4 ]
机构
[1] Barretos Canc Hosp, Dept Gynecol Oncol, Barretos, Brazil
[2] Inst Cancerol Las Amer, Dept Gynecol Oncol, Medellin, Colombia
[3] Univ Texas MD Anderson Canc Ctr, Dept Biostat, Houston, TX 77030 USA
[4] Univ Texas MD Anderson Canc Ctr, Dept Gynecol Oncol & Reprod Med, Houston, TX 77030 USA
关键词
FERTILITY; OUTCOMES; CARCINOMA; SERIES;
D O I
10.1016/j.ygyno.2015.06.023
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
Objectives. Radical trachelectomy is considered standard of care in patients with early-stage cervical cancer interested in future fertility. The goal of this study was to compare operative, oncologic, and fertility outcomes in patients with early-stage cervical cancer undergoing open vs. minimally invasive radical trachelectomy. Methods. A retrospective review was performed of patients from four institutions who underwent radical trachelectomy for early-stage cervical cancer from June 2002 to July 2013. Perioperative, oncologic, and fertility outcomes were compared between patients undergoing open vs. minimally invasive surgery. Results. A total of 100 patients were included in the analysis. Fifty-eight patients underwent open radical trachelectomy and 42 patients underwent minimally invasive surgery (MIS = laparoscopic or robotic). There were no differences in patient age, body mass index, race, histology, lymph vascular space invasion, or stage between the two groups. The median surgical time for MIS was 272 min [range, 130-441 min] compared with 270 min [range, 150-373 min] for open surgery (p = 0.78). Blood loss was significantly lower for MIS vs. laparotomy (50 mL [range, 10-225 mL] vs. 300 mL [50-1100 mL]) (p <0.0001). Nine patients required blood transfusion, all in the open surgery group (p = 0.010). Length of hospitalization was shorter for MIS than for laparotomy (1 day [1-3 days] vs. 4 days [1-9 days]) (p <0.0001). Three intraoperative complications occurred (3%): 1 bladder injury, and 1 fallopian tube injury requiring unilateral salpingectomy in the MIS group and 1 vascular injury in the open surgery group. The median lymph node count was 17 (range, 5-47) for MIS vs. 22 (range, 7-48) for open surgery (p = 0.03). There were no differences in the rate of postoperative complications (30% MIS vs. 31% open surgery). Among 83 patients who preserved their fertility (33 MIS vs. 50 open surgery), 34 (41%) patients attempted to get pregnant. Sixteen (47%) patients were able to do so (MIS: 2 vs. laparotomy: 14, p = 0.01). The pregnancy rate was higher in the open surgery group when compared to the MIS group (51% vs. 28%, p = 0.018). However, median follow-up was shorter is the MIS group compared with the open surgery group (25 months [range, 10-69] vs. 66 months [range, 11-147]). To date, there has been one recurrence in the laparotomy group and none in the MIS group. Conclusions. Our results suggest that radical trachelectomy via MIS results in less blood loss and a shorter hospital stay. Fertility rates appear higher in patients undergoing open radical trachelectomy. (C) 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:585 / 589
页数:5
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Trachelectomy for reproductive-aged women with early-stage cervical cancer: minimally invasive surgery versus laparotomy
    Matsuo, Koji
    Chen, Ling
    Mandelbaum, Rachel S.
    Melamed, Alexander
    Roman, Lynda D.
    Wright, Jason D.
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY, 2019, 220 (05) : 469.e1 - 469.e13
  • [2] Open vs minimally invasive radical trachelectomy in early-stage cervical cancer: International Radical Trachelectomy Assessment Study
    Salvo, Gloria
    Ramirez, Pedro T.
    Leitao, Mario M.
    Cibula, David
    Wu, Xiaohua
    Falconer, Henrik
    Persson, Jan
    Perrotta, Myriam
    Mosgaard, Berit J.
    Kucukmetin, Ali
    Berlev, Igor
    Rendon, Gabriel
    Liu, Kaijiang
    Vieira, Marcelo
    Capilna, Mihai E.
    Fotopoulou, Christina
    Baiocchi, Glauco
    Kaidarova, Dilyara
    Ribeiro, Reitan
    Pedra-Nobre, Silvana
    Kocian, Roman
    Li, Xiaoqi
    Li, Jin
    Palsdottir, Kolbrun
    Noll, Florencia
    Rundle, Stuart
    Ulrikh, Elena
    Hu, Zhijun
    Gheorghe, Mihai
    Saso, Srdjan
    Bolatbekova, Raikhan
    Tsunoda, Audrey
    Pitcher, Brandelyn
    Wu, Jimin
    Urbauer, Diana
    Pareja, Rene
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY, 2022, 226 (01)
  • [3] MINIMALLY INVASIVE SURGERY VERSUS LAPAROTOMY FOR RADICAL HYSTERECTOMY IN THE MANAGEMENT OF EARLY-STAGE CERVICAL CANCER: SURVIVAL OUTCOMES
    Brandt, B.
    Sioulas, V.
    Kuhn, T.
    LaVigne, K.
    Gardner, G.
    Sonoda, Y.
    Chi, D.
    Roche, K. Long
    Mueller, J.
    Jewell, E.
    Broach, V.
    Zivanovic, O.
    Abu-Rustum, N.
    Leitao, M., Jr.
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF GYNECOLOGICAL CANCER, 2018, 28 : 969 - 969
  • [4] Minimally invasive surgery versus laparotomy for radical hysterectomy in the management of early-stage cervical cancer: Survival outcomes
    Brandt, Benny
    Sioulas, Vasileios
    Basaran, Derman
    Kuhn, Theresa
    LaVigne, Katherine
    Gardner, Ginger J.
    Sonoda, Yukio
    Chi, Dennis S.
    Roche, Kara C. Long
    Mueller, Jennifer J.
    Jewell, Elizabeth L.
    Broach, Vance A.
    Zivanovic, Oliver
    Abu-Rustum, Nadeem R.
    Leitao, Mario M., Jr.
    GYNECOLOGIC ONCOLOGY, 2020, 156 (03) : 591 - 597
  • [5] Revolutionizing Early-Stage Cervical Cancer Treatment: A Comprehensive Review of Radical Trachelectomy as a Minimally Invasive Approach
    Patel, Drashti
    Tayade, Surekha
    Thakur, Aditi Singh
    Singh, Sukanya
    CUREUS JOURNAL OF MEDICAL SCIENCE, 2024, 16 (02)
  • [6] A meta-analysis of treatment for early-stage cervical cancer: open versus minimally invasive radical trachelectomy
    Zi Lv
    Yu-ying Wang
    Yu-wen Wang
    Jun-jie He
    Wen-wei Lan
    Jia-ying Peng
    Zi-han Lin
    Ruo-fei Zhu
    Jie Zhou
    Zi-qi Chen
    Ying-hui Jiang
    Yi Yuan
    Jian Xiong
    BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth, 23
  • [7] A meta-analysis of treatment for early-stage cervical cancer: open versus minimally invasive radical trachelectomy
    Lv, Zi
    Wang, Yu-ying
    Wang, Yu-wen
    He, Jun-jie
    Lan, Wen-wei
    Peng, Jia-ying
    Lin, Zi-han
    Zhu, Ruo-fei
    Zhou, Jie
    Chen, Zi-qi
    Jiang, Ying-hui
    Yuan, Yi
    Xiong, Jian
    BMC PREGNANCY AND CHILDBIRTH, 2023, 23 (01)
  • [8] Multicenter study of minimally invasive surgery versus laparotomy for radical hysterectomy in the management of early-stage cervical cancer: Survival outcomes
    Brandt, B.
    Sioulas, V.
    LaVigne, K.
    Shahin, M. S.
    Bruce, S. F.
    Black, D.
    Gandhi, M.
    Scalici, J. M.
    Jones, N. L.
    Paladugu, R.
    Brown, J.
    Levine, M. D.
    Naumann, R. W.
    Mendivil, A.
    Goldstein, B.
    Lim, P. C.
    Kang, E.
    Cantrell, L. A.
    Sullivan, M. W.
    Abu-Rustum, N. R.
    Leitao, M. M., Jr.
    GYNECOLOGIC ONCOLOGY, 2019, 154 : 26 - 26
  • [9] Comparison of Survival Outcomes between Minimally Invasive Surgery and Open Radical Hysterectomy in Early-Stage Cervical Cancer
    Chen, I-Ning
    Wang, I-Te
    Mu, Hsueh-Yu
    Qiu, J-Timothy
    Liu, Wei-Min
    Chang, Ching-Wen
    Chiu, Yen-Hsieh
    CANCERS, 2022, 14 (09)
  • [10] An update of oncologic and obstetric outcomes of radical trachelectomy for early-stage cervical cancer: The need for further minimally invasive treatment
    Tamauchi, Satoshi
    Iyoshi, Shohei
    Yoshihara, Masato
    Yoshida, Kosuke
    Ikeda, Yoshiki
    Shimizu, Yusuke
    Yokoi, Akira
    Niimi, Kaoru
    Yoshikawa, Nobuhisa
    Kajiyama, Hiroaki
    JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS AND GYNAECOLOGY RESEARCH, 2024, 50 (02) : 175 - 181