Adverse effect of laparoscopic radical hysterectomy depends on tumor size in patients with cervical cancer
Authors Hu TWY, Ming X, Yan HZ, Li ZY
Received 24 May 2019
Accepted for publication 5 August 2019
Published 9 September 2019 Volume 2019:11 Pages 8249—8255
Checked for plagiarism Yes
Review by Single-blind
Peer reviewer comments 2
Editor who approved publication: Dr Antonella D'Anneo
Ting Wen Yi Hu1,2, Xiu Ming1, Hao Zheng Yan1, Zheng Yu Li1,2
1Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, West China Second University Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan, People’s Republic of China; 2Key Laboratory of Obstetrics and Gynecologic and Pediatric Diseases and Birth Defects of Ministry of Education, West China Second Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan, People’s Republic of China
Correspondence: Zheng Yu Li
West China Second University Hospital, Sichuan University, No. 20 Section 3, Renmin South Road, Chengdu, Sichuan 610041, People’s Republic of China
Tel +86 1 898 215 1025
Fax +86 28 8 550 2391
Purpose: The study aimed to explore the survival outcomes of early-stage cervical cancer (CC) patients treated with laparoscopic/abdominal radical hysterectomy (LRH/ARH).
Patients and Methods: We performed a retrospective analysis involving women who had undergone LRH/ARH for CC in early stage during the 2013–2015 period in West China Second University Hospital. The survival outcomes and potential prognostic factors were evaluated using Kaplan–Meier method and Cox regression analysis, respectively.
Results: A total of 678 patients were included in our analysis. The overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) between the ARH (n=423) and LRH (n=255) groups achieved no significant differences (p=0.122, 0.285, respectively). However, in patients with a tumor diameter >4 cm, the OS of the LRH group was significantly shorter than that of the ARH group (p=0.017). Conversely, in patients with a tumor diameter ≤4 cm, the LRH group had a significantly longer OS than the ARH group (p=0.013). The multivariate Cox analysis revealed that International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics stage, histology, parametrial invasion, and pelvic lymph node invasion were independent prognostic factors for OS and PFS, whereas surgical method was not a statistically significant predictor of OS (p=0.806) or PFS (p=0.236) in CC patients.
Conclusion: LRH was an alternative to ARH for surgical treatment of CC patients with a tumor diameter ≤4 cm. However, for the patients with a tumor diameter >4 cm, priority should be given to ARH.
Keywords: cervical cancer, laparoscopy, hysterectomy, prognosis
This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited. The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution - Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License. By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. For permission for commercial use of this work, please see paragraphs 4.2 and 5 of our Terms.Download Article [PDF] View Full Text [HTML][Machine readable]