Laparoscopic assisted radical vaginal hysterectomy versus radical abdominal hysterectomy-a randomised phase II trial: perioperative outcomes and surgicopathological measurements

被引:65
作者
Naik, R. [1 ]
Jackson, K. S. [1 ]
Lopes, A. [2 ]
Cross, P. [3 ]
Henry, J. A. [3 ]
机构
[1] Queen Elizabeth Hosp, No Gynaecol Oncol Ctr, Gateshead NE9 6SX, England
[2] Royal Truro Hosp, Dept Gynaecol Oncol, Truro, Cornwall, England
[3] Queen Elizabeth Hosp, Dept Pathol, Gateshead, England
关键词
Cervical cancer; laparoscopic assisted radical vaginal hysterectomy; radical hysterectomy; randomised controlled trial; surgical outcome; surgical resection; CERVICAL-CANCER; SURGERY;
D O I
10.1111/j.1471-0528.2010.02479.x
中图分类号
R71 [妇产科学];
学科分类号
100211 ;
摘要
Objective To evaluate perioperative surgical outcomes and resection size for laparoscopically assisted radical vaginal hysterectomy (LARVH) compared with radical abdominal hysterectomy (RAH). Design A prospective randomised phase II trial. Population Early stage IB cervical cancer requiring radical surgical treatment. Setting Northern Gynaecological Oncology Centre, Gateshead, UK. Methods Fifteen women were randomised to LARVH and to RAH. Main outcome measures Outcomes included requirement in days for bladder catheterisation after surgery, operating time, blood loss, hospital stay, opiate pain relief, complication rate, time to normal activities and resection size of major ligaments and vaginal cuff. Results Statistically significant differences were found between LARVH and RAH, respectively: median duration of bladder catheterisation, 4 days versus 21 days (P = 0.003); median operating time, 180 minutes versus 138 minutes (P = 0.05); median blood loss, 400 ml versus 1000 ml (P = 0.05), median hospital stay, 5 days versus 7 days (P = 0.04) and median opiate requirement in the first 36 hours postoperatively, 30 mg versus 53 mg (P = 0.004). The mean resected lengths for LARVH versus RAH, respectively, were: mean resected vaginal cuff, 1.26 cm versus 2.16 cm (P = 0.014); mean resected cardinal ligament length, 1.30 cm versus 2.79 cm (P = 0.013) and mean resected uterosacral ligament length, 1.47 cm versus 4.68 cm (P = 0.034). Conclusions This study confirms the short-term surgical benefits of LARVH. In addition, LARVH has been shown to be a less radical procedure than RAH, supporting the need for strict patient selection and to restrict the procedure to small tumours.
引用
收藏
页码:746 / 751
页数:6
相关论文
共 15 条
[1]  
Dargent D, 2000, GYNECOLOGIC ONCOLOGY ISSUES IN THE 8TH IGCS MEETING OF BUENOS AIRES, P23
[2]   Radical vaginal versus abdominal trachelectomy for stage IB1 cervical cancer: A comparison of surgical and pathologic outcomes [J].
Einstein, Margaret H. ;
Park, Kay J. ;
Sonoda, Yukio ;
Carter, Jeanne ;
Chi, Dennis S. ;
Barakat, Richard R. ;
Abu-Rustum, Nadeem R. .
GYNECOLOGIC ONCOLOGY, 2009, 112 (01) :73-77
[3]   Effect of surgeon's experience on the surgical outcome of laparoscopic surgery for women with endometrial cancer [J].
Eltabbakh, GH .
GYNECOLOGIC ONCOLOGY, 2000, 78 (01) :58-61
[4]   Parametrial resection for invasive cervical cancer [J].
Hagen, B ;
Shepherd, JH ;
Jacobs, IJ .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF GYNECOLOGICAL CANCER, 2000, 10 (01) :1-6
[5]   Laparoscopic-assisted radical vaginal hysterectomy (LARVH):: prospective evaluation of 200 patients with cervical cancer [J].
Hertel, H ;
Köhler, C ;
Michels, W ;
Possover, M ;
Tozzi, R ;
Schneider, A .
GYNECOLOGIC ONCOLOGY, 2003, 90 (03) :505-511
[6]   Laparoscopically assisted radical vaginal hysterectomy vs. radical abdominal hysterectomy for cervical cancer: a match controlled study [J].
Jackson, KS ;
Das, N ;
Naik, R ;
Lopes, AD ;
Godfrey, KA ;
Hatem, MH ;
Monaghan, JM .
GYNECOLOGIC ONCOLOGY, 2004, 95 (03) :655-661
[7]  
LOPES ADB, 1995, OBSTET GYNECOL, V86, P960
[8]   The CONSORT statement: revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel-group randomised trials [J].
Moher, D ;
Schulz, KF ;
Altman, DG .
LANCET, 2001, 357 (9263) :1191-1194
[9]   Is laparoscopically assisted radical vaginal hysterectomy for cervical carcinoma safe? A case control study with follow up [J].
Morgan, D. J. ;
Hunter, D. C. ;
McCracken, G. ;
McClelland, H. R. ;
Price, J. H. ;
Dobbs, S. P. .
BJOG-AN INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS AND GYNAECOLOGY, 2007, 114 (05) :537-542
[10]   Conservative surgical management of small-volume stage IB1 cervical cancer [J].
Naik, R. ;
Cross, P. ;
Nayar, A. ;
Mayadevi, S. ;
Lopes, A. ;
Godfrey, K. ;
Hatem, H. .
BJOG-AN INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS AND GYNAECOLOGY, 2007, 114 (08) :958-963