Comparison of survival outcome of open, total laparoscopic, and laparoscopy-assisted radical vaginal hysterectomy for stage IB2 cervical cancer patients: A multicenter retrospective study

Hyung Joon Yoon,Byung Su Kwon,Hyun Jin Rho,Tae Hwa Lee,Dae Hoon Jeong,Ki Hyung Kim,Dong Soo Suh,Yong Jung Song
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/md.0000000000037426
IF: 1.6
2024-03-09
Medicine
Abstract:Over the past 3 decades, there has been remarkable advancement in the field of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) for the treatment of early stage cervical cancer. Minimally invasive surgery radical hysterectomy (MIS RH), when compared to total abdominal radical hysterectomy (TARH), is related to reduced bleeding, shorter length of hospitalization, and decreased postoperative complications. [ 1–5 ] A histological analysis revealed that MIS RH had no influence on the surgical extent on parametrial resection [ 6 ] Furthermore, other research has demonstrated that MIS RH has survival outcomes that are equivalent to those of TARH. [ 7–10 ] Previous findings indicate that MIS RH is commonly applied for the treatment of early stage cervical cancer. But, there is a limitation of level 1 data available for comparing the survival outcomes of the 2 RH procedures. Laparoscopic approach to cervical cancer (LACC) trial, [ 11 ] a global phase III randomized trial, has reported that MIS RH was correlated with a significant decrease in disease-free survival (DFS) (hazard ratio [HR] 3.74, 95% confidence interval [CI] [1.63, 8.58]). Additionally, mortality was found to be 6 times higher (HR 6.00, 95% CI [1.77, 20.30]) when compared to TARH. Similarly, analysis of oncologic outcomes from the SEER database revealed that MIS RH has been associated with increased 4-year mortality rates. [ 12 ] The findings of this analysis have caused widely debated on applying of MIS RH for early-stage cervical cancer.
medicine, general & internal
What problem does this paper attempt to address?