Background and ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to compare the feasibility, morbidity, and recurrence rate of total laparoscopic radical hysterectomy (LRH) with those of abdominal radical hysterectomy (ARH) for bulky early-stage cervical cancer.MethodsWe performed a retrospective cohort study of 112 patients with stage IB1 or IIA2 cervical cancer in which the tumor diameter was 3 cm or greater. All patients underwent LRH (n = 30) or ARH (n = 82) with pelvic lymphadenectomy and/or para-aortic lymph node sampling between May 2011 and November 2014. Perioperative outcomes were compared between the 2 surgical groups.ResultsThe laparoscopic approach consisted of 4 trocar insertions. Age, tumor diameter, and pelvic lymph nodes significantly differed between the 2 cohorts. Body mass index, International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics stage, histologic type and grade, deep stromal invasion, lymphovascular space invasion, positive margins, and adjuvant therapy were not significantly different between the 2 cohorts. Laparoscopic radical hysterectomy exhibited favorable results compared with ARH in terms of operating time, blood loss, intestinal exhaust time, and length of hospital stay. In addition, recurrence was observed in 5 LRH patients (16.7%) and 9 ARH patients (11.7%).ConclusionsThe surgical outcomes of LRH with pelvic lymphadenectomy and/or para-aortic lymph node sampling exhibited a similar therapeutic efficacy to those of the ARH approach.
Robotic versus total laparoscopic radical hysterectomy with pelvic lymphadenectomy for the treatment of early cervical cancer
