Cancer Management and Research (Sep 2019)
Adverse effect of laparoscopic radical hysterectomy depends on tumor size in patients with cervical cancer
Abstract
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 ChinaCorrespondence: Zheng Yu LiWest China Second University Hospital, Sichuan University, No. 20 Section 3, Renmin South Road, Chengdu, Sichuan 610041, People’s Republic of ChinaTel +86 1 898 215 1025Fax +86 28 8 550 2391Email [email protected]: 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
