Comparison of survival outcomes between minimally invasive surgery and conventional open surgery for radical hysterectomy as primary treatment in patients with stage IB1-IIA2 cervical cancer

被引:123
作者
Kim, Se Ik [1 ]
Cho, Jae Hyun [1 ]
Seol, Aeran [1 ]
Kim, Young Im [1 ]
Lee, Maria [1 ]
Kim, Hee Seung [1 ]
Chung, Hyun Hoon [1 ]
Kim, Jae-Weon [1 ]
Park, Noh Hyun [1 ]
Song, Yong-Sang [1 ]
机构
[1] Seoul Natl Univ, Coll Med, Dept Obstet & Gynecol, 101 Daehak Ro, Seoul 03080, South Korea
关键词
Cervical cancer; Radical hysterectomy; Minimally invasive surgery; Laparoscopic surgery; Survival outcome; IB1; STATISTICS; RECURRENCE; CRITERIA; SOCIETY;
D O I
10.1016/j.ygyno.2019.01.008
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
Objective. To compare survival outcomes of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) and conventional open surgery for radical hysterectomy (RH) among patients with early-stage cervical cancer (CC). Methods. We retrospectively identified stage IB1-IIA2 CC patients who underwent either laparoscopic or open Type C RH between 2000 and 2018. Patients' clinicopathologic characteristics and survival outcomes were compared according to the surgical approach. For a more robust statistical analysis, we narrowed the study population down to the patients with stage IB1 who underwent pre-operative MRI. Results. In total, 435 and 158 patients were assigned to open surgery and MIS groups, respectively. MIS group had significantly less parametrial invasion (6.3% vs. 15.4%; P = 0.004). Despite similar proportions of patients received adjuvant treatment, concurrent chemoradiation therapy was performed less frequently in MIS group. After a median follow up of 114.8 months, the groups showed similar overall survival; however, MIS group displayed poorer progression-free survival (PFS; 5-year rate, 78.5% vs. 89.7%; P < 0.001). Multivariate analyses identified MIS as an independent poor prognostic factor for PFS (adjusted HR, 2.883; 95% CI, 1.711-4.859; P < 0.001). Consistent results were observed among 349 patients with stage 181: MIS was associated with higher recurrence rates (adjusted HR, 2.276; 95% CI, 1.039-4.986; P = 0.040). However, MIS did not influence PFS of stage IBI patients with cervical mass size <= 2 cm on pre-operative MRI (adjusted HR, 1.146; 95% CI, 0.278-4.724; P = 0.850). Conclusions. Overall, MIS RH was associated with higher recurrence rates than open RH in patients with earlystage CC. However, MIS was not a poor prognostic factor among those with stage IB1 and cervical mass size <= 2 cm on pre-operative MRI. (C) 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:3 / 12
页数:10
相关论文
共 39 条
[1]   Laparoscopic Versus Open Abdominal Management of Cervical Cancer: Long-Term Results From a Propensity-Matched Analysis [J].
Bogani, Giorgio ;
Cromi, Antonella ;
Uccella, Stefano ;
Serati, Maurizio ;
Casarin, Jvan ;
Pinelli, Ciro ;
Ghezzi, Fabio .
JOURNAL OF MINIMALLY INVASIVE GYNECOLOGY, 2014, 21 (05) :857-862
[2]   Comparison of Laparoscopic-Assisted Radical Vaginal Hysterectomy and Laparoscopic Radical Hysterectomy in the Treatment of Cervical Cancer [J].
Choi, Chel Hun ;
Lee, Jeong-Won ;
Lee, Yoo-Young ;
Kim, Ha-Jeong ;
Song, Taejong ;
Kim, Min-Kyu ;
Kim, Tae-Joong ;
Kim, Byoung-Gie ;
Bae, Duk-Soo .
ANNALS OF SURGICAL ONCOLOGY, 2012, 19 (12) :3839-3848
[3]   The European Society of Gynaecological Oncology/European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology/European Society of Pathology guidelines for the management of patients with cervical cancer [J].
Cibula, David ;
Poetter, Richard ;
Planchamp, Francois ;
Avall-Lundqvist, Elisabeth ;
Fischerova, Daniela ;
Meder, Christine Haie ;
Koehler, Christhardt ;
Landoni, Fabio ;
Lax, Sigurd ;
Lindegaard, Jacob Christian ;
Mahantshetty, Umesh ;
Mathevet, Patrice ;
McCluggage, W. Glenn ;
McCormack, Mary ;
Naik, Raj ;
Nout, Remi ;
Pignata, Sandro ;
Ponce, Jordi ;
Querleu, Denis ;
Raspagliesi, Francesco ;
Rodolakis, Alexandros ;
Tamussino, Karl ;
Wimberger, Pauline ;
Raspollini, Maria Rosaria .
RADIOTHERAPY AND ONCOLOGY, 2018, 127 (03) :404-416
[4]   Role of Minimally Invasive Surgery in Gynecologic Oncology An Updated Survey of Members of the Society of Gynecologic Oncology [J].
Conrad, Lesley B. ;
Ramirez, Pedro T. ;
Burke, William ;
Naumann, R. Wendel ;
Ring, Kari L. ;
Munsell, Mark F. ;
Frumovitz, Michael .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF GYNECOLOGICAL CANCER, 2015, 25 (06) :1121-1127
[5]   Japan Society of Gynecologic Oncology guidelines 2011 for the treatment of uterine cervical cancer [J].
Ebina, Yasuhiko ;
Yaegashi, Nobuo ;
Katabuchi, Hidetaka ;
Nagase, Satoru ;
Udagawa, Yasuhiro ;
Hachisuga, Toru ;
Saito, Tsuyoshi ;
Mikami, Mikio ;
Aoki, Yoichi ;
Yoshikawa, Hiroyuki .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY, 2015, 20 (02) :240-248
[6]   New response evaluation criteria in solid tumours: Revised RECIST guideline (version 1.1) [J].
Eisenhauer, E. A. ;
Therasse, P. ;
Bogaerts, J. ;
Schwartz, L. H. ;
Sargent, D. ;
Ford, R. ;
Dancey, J. ;
Arbuck, S. ;
Gwyther, S. ;
Mooney, M. ;
Rubinstein, L. ;
Shankar, L. ;
Dodd, L. ;
Kaplan, R. ;
Lacombe, D. ;
Verweij, J. .
EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF CANCER, 2009, 45 (02) :228-247
[7]   Comparison of total laparoscopic and abdominal radical hysterectomy for patients with early-stage cervical cancer [J].
Frumovitz, Michael ;
dos Reis, Ricardo ;
Sun, Charlotte C. ;
Milam, Michael R. ;
Bevers, Michael W. ;
Brown, Jubilee ;
Slomovitz, Brian M. ;
Ramirez, Pedro T. .
OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY, 2007, 110 (01) :96-102
[8]   Adenocarcinoma: A unique cervical cancer [J].
Gien, Lilian T. ;
Beauchemin, Marie-Claude ;
Thomas, Gillian .
GYNECOLOGIC ONCOLOGY, 2010, 116 (01) :140-146
[9]  
Jemal A, 2011, CA-CANCER J CLIN, V61, P134, DOI [10.3322/caac.20115, 10.3322/caac.21492, 10.3322/caac.20107]
[10]   Robotic radical hysterectomy is superior to laparoscopic radical hysterectomy and open radical hysterectomy in the treatment of cervical cancer [J].
Jin, Yue-Mei ;
Liu, Shan-Shan ;
Chen, Jun ;
Chen, Yan-Nan ;
Ren, Chen-Chen .
PLOS ONE, 2018, 13 (03)