scholarly journals EPV078/#473 Effects of preoperative cervical conization on survival outcomes in patients with early-stage cervical cancer who undergo primary radical hysterectomy: a propensity score matching study

Author(s):  
SI Kim ◽  
HS Kim ◽  
HH Chung ◽  
J-W Kim ◽  
NH Park ◽  
...  
2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pengfei Li ◽  
Shan Kang ◽  
Jianxin Guo ◽  
Shiqi Liang ◽  
Ying Yang ◽  
...  

Abstract Objectives: To compare the oncological outcomes of the first 50 laparoscopic radical hysterectomy (LRH) surgeries with the last 50 LRH, performed by high volume surgeons, for cervical cancer patients.Design: A nationwide multicentre retrospective cohort study Setting: Clinical diagnosis and treatment of cervical cancer patients in mainland China (Four C) database.Population: women with early cervical cancer undergone LRH. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed the oncological outcomes of 1004 cervical cancer patients who underwent LRH performed by 19 surgeons. They were divided into two groups according to the sequence of operations, the first 50 and the last 50 patients with LRH. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis and log-rank test, Cox proportional risk regression model and propensity score matching were used. Main Outcome Measures: 5-year overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) rates. Results: There were no significant differences in the 5-year OS and DFS between first 50 patients with LRH group (n=413) and last 50 patients with LRH group (n=591) (OS: p=0.388; DFS: p=0.226). The last 50 cases of LRH was not an independent risk factor for OS and DFS in early cervical cancer patients (p=0.830, p=0.300). After propensity score matching, similar outcomes were observed (n=364:364,OS:P = 0.764; DFS:P = 0.705). Conclusions: The oncological outcomes of the first 50 LRH surgeries were similar to those of the last 50 surgeries in patients with early-stage cervical cancer. Increase in the surgeons’ experience did not improve significantly with oncological outcomes of patients with early stage cervical cancer after LRH.


BMJ Open ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (8) ◽  
pp. e038020
Author(s):  
Xiaopei Chao ◽  
Ming Wu ◽  
Shuiqing Ma ◽  
Xianjie Tan ◽  
Sen Zhong ◽  
...  

IntroductionRecent studies have revealed that the oncological survival outcomes of minimally invasive radical hysterectomy (MIRH) are inferior to those of abdominal radical hysterectomy (ARH) in early-stage cervical cancer, but the potential reasons are unclear.Methods and analysisEach expert from 28 study centres participating in a previously reported randomised controlled trial (NCT03739944) will provide successive eligible records of at least 100 patients who accepted radical hysterectomy for early-stage cervical cancer between 1 January 2009 and 31 December 2015. Inclusion criteria consist of a definite pathological evaluation of stages IA1 (with positive lymphovascular space invasion), IA2 and IB1 according to the International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics 2009 staging system and a histological subtype of squamous cell carcinoma, adenocarcinoma or adenosquamous carcinoma. The primary endpoint is 5-year disease-free survival between the MIRH and ARH groups. The secondary endpoints include the MIRH learning curves of participating surgeons, 5-year overall survival between the MIRH and ARH groups, survival outcomes according to surgical chronology, surgical outcomes and sites of recurrence and potential risk factors that affect survival outcomes. A subgroup analysis in patients with tumour diameter less than 2 cm will follow the similar flow diagram.Ethics and disseminationThis study has been approved by the Institutional Review Board of Peking Union Medical College Hospital (registration no. JS-1711), and is also filed on record by all other 27 centres. The results will be disseminated through community events and peer-reviewed journals.Trial registration numberNCT03738969


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document