Abstract:Objective There is recent evidence that demonstrates worse oncologic outcomes associated with minimally invasive radical hysterectomy when compared with open radical hysterectomy, particularly in patients with tumors >2 cm. The aim of our study was to retrospectively evaluate the oncological outcomes between laparoscopic and open radical hysterectomy in International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics(FIGO) 2009 stage IB1 (FIGO 2009) cervical cancer patients with tumor size ≤2 cm. Methods A retrospective review of medical records was performed to identify patients who underwent either laparoscopic or open radical hysterectomy during January 2010 and December 2018. Inclusion criteria were: (1) histologically confirmed cervical cancer including all histological types; (2) FIGO 2009 stage IB1; (3) tumor size ≤2 cm (determined by pelvic examination, magnetic resonance imaging or transvaginal ultrasound); (4) had undergone radical hysterectomy (type II or III) with pelvic and/or para-aortic lymphadenectomy as primary surgical treatment; (5) had follow-up information. Patients with FIGO 2009 stage IA1 or IA2, tumor size >2 cm, or who received neo-adjuvant chemotherapy before surgery, those with cervical cancer incidentally found after simple hysterectomy, or with insufficient data were excluded. Concurrent comparison between the laparoscopic and open cohorts was made for disease-free survival and overall survival. Results A total of 325 cervical cancer patients were included; of these, 129 patients underwent laparoscopic surgery and 196 patients had open surgery. The median follow-up times were 51.8 months (range 2–115) for laparoscopic surgery and 49.5 months (range 3–108) for open surgery. Patients in the laparoscopic group had significantly worse 5 year disease-free survival than those in the open group (90.4% vs 97.7%; p=0.02). There was no significant difference in 5 year overall survival between groups (96.9% vs 99.4%, p=0.33). The Cox proportional hazards regression analysis indicated that laparoscopic surgery was associated with lower disease-free survival compared with open surgery (adjusted hazard ratio 4.64, 95% CI 1.26 to 17.06; p=0.02). In patients with non-squamous cell carcinoma or with grade II–III, laparoscopic surgery had a significantly worse 5 year disease-free survival compared with the open surgery group (74% vs 100%, p=0.01, and 88.8% vs 98.0%, p=0.02, respectively). Conclusion Laparoscopic radical hysterectomy was associated with worse disease-free survival for stage IB1 (FIGO 2009) cervical cancer patients with tumor size ≤2 cm compared with open radical hysterectomy. Further studies may shed additional light on the impact of minimally invasive surgery in this low-risk patient population.

Radical hysterectomy with adjuvant radiotherapy versus radical radiotherapy for FIGO stage IIB cervical cancer

Radical Hysterectomy with Adjuvant Radiation Therapy Versus Definitive Radiation Therapy for International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics Stage IIb Cervical Cancer

Feasibility of Radical Hysterectomy in Women with FIGO Stage IIB Cervical Cancer: an Observation Study of 10-Year Experience in a Tertiary Center

Cost-effectiveness of Radical Hysterectomy with Adjuvant Radiotherapy Versus Radical Radiotherapy for FIGO Stage IIB Cervical Cancer

Outcome of International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics Stage IIb Cervical Cancer from 2003 to 2012: an Evaluation of Treatments and Prognosis: a Retrospective Study.

Comparison of Survival Outcomes of Abdominal Radical Hysterectomy and Radiochemotherapy IIA2 (FIGO2018) Cervical Cancer: a Retrospective Study from a Large Database of 63,926 Cases of Cervical Cancer in China.

Impact of different post-operative treatment modalities on long-term outcomes in International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) 2018 stage IIICp cervical cancer

Effect of Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy Followed by Radical Surgery for FIGO Stage IB2/IIA2 Cervical Cancer A Multi-Center Retrospective Clinical Study

Treatment results of adjuvant pelvic radiotherapy after radical hysterectomy for low-risk Stage IB1–IIA cervical cancer

Clinical Results and Prognostic Factors of Patients with Locally Advanced Cervical Carcinoma Treated with Neoadjuvant Therapy Followed by Radical Hysterectomy : a Retrospective Study of 182 Patients

Comparison of Concurrent Chemoradiotherapy Followed by Radical Surgery and High-Dose-rate Intracavitary Brachytherapy: a Retrospective Study of 240 Patients with FIGO Stage IIB Cervical Carcinoma

Role Of Adjuvant Therapy After Radical Hysterectomy In Intermediate-Risk, Early-Stage Cervical Cancer

Treatment Results of Adjuvant Chemotherapy after Radical Hysterectomy for Intermediate-Risk Stage IB-IIB Cervical Cancer

Comparison of laparoscopic and open radical hysterectomy in cervical cancer patients with tumor size ≤2 cm

Comparison of Survival Outcomes Between Radical Hysterectomy and Definitive Radiochemotherapy in Stage IB1 and IIA1 Cervical Cancer

[Efficacy of Postoperative Simple Chemotherapy and Concurrent Chemoradiotherapy in FIGO Stage IB2-IIB Cervical Cancer].

Primary Radical Hysterectomy Vs Chemoradiation for IB2-IIA Cervical Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Treatment of FIGO 2018 stage IIIC cervical cancer with different local tumor factors

Minimally Invasive Versus Open Surgery for Radical Hysterectomy Followed By Adjuvant Radiotherapy in Intermediate- or High-Risk Early-Stage Cancer of The Cervix: A Retrospective Study

Clinical Effects of Concurrent Radiochemotherapy Followed by Radical Surgery and Radical Radiotherapy with Concurrent Chemotherapy: a Comparative Study of 243 Patients with FIGO Stage ⅡB Cervical Cancer

Evaluation of the Effects of Type II Radical Hysterectomy in the Treatment of 960 Patients with Stage IB-IIB Cervical Carcinoma: A Retrospective Study.