Surgical outcomes of laparoscopic radical hysterectomy for patients with early cervical cancer: Initial experience in Cancer Institute

Abstract Objective: Minimally invasive radical hysterectomy has been historically considered oncologically equivalent to open radical hysterectomy for patients with early cervical cancer. However, it was recently reported to be significantly inferior in long-term outcomes of the minimally invasive approach to open approach. The underlying causes of this finding arouse great concern and remain controversial. Here we would like to share some initial experience of tumor-free techniques in laparoscopic procedures for early cervical cancer, including uterine manipulator-free manipulation and enclosed colpotomy. Methods: Between December 2019 and May 2020, we performed manipulator-free laparoscopic radical hysterectomy in 26 cases with early cervical cancer. The modified tumor-free techniques, including uterine manipulator-free manipulation and enclosed colpotomy, was described in detail with illustrations.Results: The procedures went well in all patients. In our initial experience, these modifications do not increase the difficulty of surgical techniques, and can be well performed by the experienced surgeons.Conclusions: These techniques are safe and feasible, and the effects on oncological outcomes deserve follow-up and further clinical studies.

Download Full-text

ROBOTIC VERSUS LAPAROSCOPIC RADICAL HYSTERECTOMY FOR EARLY CERVICAL CANCER: A CASE MATCHED CONTROL STUDY

10.26226/morressier.599bdc7bd462b80296ca0ad9 ◽

2017 ◽

Author(s):

Conte Carmine

Keyword(s):

Cervical Cancer ◽

Radical Hysterectomy ◽

Matched Control ◽

Laparoscopic Radical Hysterectomy ◽

Early Cervical Cancer ◽

Control Study

Download Full-text

Laparoscopic radical hysterectomy with lymphadenectomy in patients with early cervical cancer: Our instruments and technique

Surgical Oncology ◽

10.1016/j.suronc.2008.07.009 ◽

2009 ◽

Vol 18 (4) ◽

pp. 289-297 ◽

Cited By ~ 16

Author(s):

Mario Malzoni ◽

Raffaele Tinelli ◽

Francesco Cosentino ◽

Ciro Perone ◽

Domenico Iuzzolino ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Cervical Cancer ◽

Radical Hysterectomy ◽

Laparoscopic Radical Hysterectomy ◽

Early Cervical Cancer

Download Full-text

Robotic-Assisted Radical Hysterectomy Results in Better Surgical Outcomes Compared With the Traditional Laparoscopic Radical Hysterectomy for the Treatment of Cervical Cancer

International Journal of Gynecological Cancer ◽

10.1097/igc.0000000000001101 ◽

2017 ◽

Vol 27 (9) ◽

pp. 1990-1999 ◽

Cited By ~ 10

Author(s):

Ji-Chan Nie ◽

An-Qi Yan ◽

Xi-Shi Liu

Keyword(s):

Cervical Cancer ◽

Radical Hysterectomy ◽

Surgical Outcomes ◽

Operating Time ◽

Bowel Function ◽

Lymph Node Yield ◽

Laparoscopic Radical Hysterectomy ◽

Function Recovery ◽

Node Yield

ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to compare the surgical outcomes of robotic-assisted radical hysterectomy (RRH) with traditional laparoscopic radical hysterectomy (TLRH) for the treatment of early-stage cervical cancer in a large retrospective cohort of a total of 933 patients.MethodsWe have enrolled 100 patients into the RRH and 833 patients into the TLRH group. The surgical outcomes include operating time, blood loss, transfusion rate, pelvic lymph node yield, hospitalization days, duration of bowel function recovery, catheter removal before and after 3 weeks, conversion to laparotomy, and intraoperative and postoperative complications. Follow-up results were also analyzed for all patients.ResultsBoth groups have similar patient and tumor characteristics but patients with a larger lesion size were preferably enrolled in the TLRH treatment group. The treatment with RRH was generally superior to TLRH with respect to operating time, blood loss, length of hospitalization, duration of bowel function recovery, and postoperative complications. On follow-up of patients, there were no relapses reported in the RRH group compared with 4% of relapse cases and 2.9% of deaths because of metastasis in the TLRH group. No conversion of laparotomy occurred in the RRH group. No significant difference was found with respect to intraoperative complications and blood transfusion between both groups.ConclusionsThe results from this study suggest that RRH is superior to TLRH with regard to surgical outcome and may pose a safe and feasible alternative to TLRH. The operating time and lymph node yield is acceptable. Our study is one of the largest single-center studies of surgical outcomes comparing RRH with TLRH during cervical cancer treatment and will significantly contribute to the safety of alternative treatment options for patients. Furthermore, the difference detected between TLRH and RRH group is further strengthened by the great expertise of the surgeon performing laparoscopic surgeries.

Download Full-text