Dataset Information

Identification and injury to the inferior hypogastric plexus in nerve-sparing radical hysterectomy.

ABSTRACT: Waterjet dissection of the inferior hypogastric plexus (IHP) resulted in a more rapid return of normal urodynamics than blunt dissection (control group) in patients who received laparoscopic nerve-sparing radical hysterectomy (NSRH) in a randomized controlled study. However, the definite reasons for these results were unknown. This subgroup analysis compared the neural areas and impairment in the IHP uterine branches harvested during NSRH as an alternative to the IHP vesical branches between the waterjet and control groups. This study included samples from 30 eligible patients in each group of the trial NCT03020238. At least one specimen from each side of the IHP uterine branches was resected. The tissues were scanned, images were captured, and the neural component areas were calculated using the image segmentation method. Immunohistochemical staining was used to evaluate neural impairment. The control and waterjet groups had similar areas of whole tissues sent for evaluation. However, the control group had significantly fewer areas (median 272158 versus 200439 ?m2, p?=?0.044) and a lower percentage (median 4.9% versus 3.0%, p?=?0.011) of neural tissues. No significant changes in immunohistochemical staining were found between the two groups. For patients with residual urine ?100 and >100?ml at 14 days after NSRH (42 and 18 patients, respectively), there were significantly different percentages of neural tissues in the resected samples (p?

SUBMITTER: Li L

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6744562 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Sep

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Identification and injury to the inferior hypogastric plexus in nerve-sparing radical hysterectomy.

Li Lei L Bi Yalan Y Wang Leiming L Mao Xinxin X Kraemer Bernhard B Lang Jinghe J Cui Quancai Q Wu Ming M

Scientific reports 20190913 1

Waterjet dissection of the inferior hypogastric plexus (IHP) resulted in a more rapid return of normal urodynamics than blunt dissection (control group) in patients who received laparoscopic nerve-sparing radical hysterectomy (NSRH) in a randomized controlled study. However, the definite reasons for these results were unknown. This subgroup analysis compared the neural areas and impairment in the IHP uterine branches harvested during NSRH as an alternative to the IHP vesical branches between the ...[more]

PMID: 31519975

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundRadical hysterectomy is one of the standard treatments for stage Ia2 to IIa cervical cancer. Bladder dysfunction caused by disruption of the pelvic autonomic nerves is a common complication following standard radical hysterectomy and can affect quality of life significantly. Nerve-sparing radical hysterectomy is a modified radical hysterectomy, developed to permit resection of oncologically relevant tissues surrounding the cervical lesion, while preserving the pelvic autonomic nerves.ObjectivesTo evaluate the benefits and harms of nerve-sparing radical hysterectomy in women with stage Ia2 to IIa cervical cancer.Search methodsWe searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2018, Issue 4), MEDLINE via Ovid (1946 to May week 2, 2018), and Embase via Ovid (1980 to 2018, week 21). We also checked registers of clinical trials, grey literature, reports of conferences, citation lists of included studies, and key textbooks for potentially relevant studies.Selection criteriaWe included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating the efficacy and safety of nerve-sparing radical hysterectomy compared to standard radical hysterectomy for women with early stage cervical cancer (stage Ia2 to IIa).Data collection and analysisWe applied standard Cochrane methodology for data collection and analysis. Two review authors independently selected potentially relevant RCTs, extracted data, evaluated risk of bias of the included studies, compared results and resolved disagreements by discussion or consultation with a third review author, and assessed the certainty of evidence.Main resultsWe identified 1332 records as a result of the search (excluding duplicates). Of the 26 studies that potentially met the review criteria, we included four studies involving 205 women; most of the trials had unclear risks of bias. We identified one ongoing trial.The analysis of overall survival was not feasible, as there were no deaths reported among women allocated to standard radical hysterectomy. However, there were two deaths in among women allocated to the nerve-sparing technique. None of the included studies reported rates of intermittent self-catheterisation over one month following surgery. We could not analyse the relative effect of the two surgical techniques on quality of life due to inconsistent data reported. Nerve-sparing radical hysterectomy reduced postoperative bladder dysfunctions in terms of a shorter time to postvoid residual volume of urine ≤ 50 mL (mean difference (MD) -13.21 days; 95% confidence interval (CI) -24.02 to -2.41; 111 women; 2 studies; low-certainty evidence) and lower volume of postvoid residual urine measured one month following operation (MD -9.59 days; 95% CI -16.28 to -2.90; 58 women; 2 study; low-certainty evidence). There were no clear differences in terms of perioperative complications (RR 0.55; 95% CI 0.24 to 1.26; 180 women; 3 studies; low-certainty evidence) and disease-free survival (HR 0.63; 95% CI 0.00 to 106.95; 86 women; one study; very low-certainty evidence) between the comparison groups.Authors' conclusionsNerve-sparing radical hysterectomy may lessen the risk of postoperative bladder dysfunction compared to the standard technique, but the certainty of this evidence is low. The very low-certainty evidence for disease-free survival and lack of information for overall survival indicate that the oncological safety of nerve-sparing radical hysterectomy for women with early stage cervical cancer remains unclear. Further large, high-quality RCTs are required to determine, if clinically meaningful differences of survival exist between these two surgical treatments.

Project description:Backgroud and objectiveNerve-sparing radical hysterectomy (NSRH) may be associated with lower postoperative morbidity than radical hysterectomy (RH). We aimed to compare the clinical efficacy and safety of abdominal or laparoscopic NSRH and RH for treating cervical cancer through systematic review and meta-analysis.MethodsPubMed, EMBASE, The Cochrane Library and the Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure databases were systematically searched for all relevant studies. Data were abstracted independently by two reviewers. A meta-analysis was performed to compare intra- and postoperative outcomes for the two techniques.ResultsA total of 17 clinical trials were identified. Meta-analysis showed that although operating time was significantly longer for abdominal or laparoscopic NSRH than for RH, NSRH based on laparotomy or laparoscopy proved more effective for postoperative recovery of bladder function. NSRH was also associated with lower bladder dysfunction morbidity and fewer postoperative complications. Two abdominal trials and one laparoscopic study further suggested that NSRH was associated with shorter time to recovery of anal/rectal function. In contrast, RH and NSRH based on laparotomy or laparoscopy were similar in terms of extent of resection, recurrence rate, survival rate, blood loss and frequency of intraoperative complications. The meta-analysis showed that abdominal NSRH was not significantly different from RH in length of hospital stay, while one trial suggested that length of hospital stay was shorter after laparoscopic NSRH than after the corresponding RH.ConclusionNSRH may be a reliable technique for treating early cervical cancer. Available evidence suggests that it is better than RH for postoperative recovery of pelvic organ function and postoperative morbidity, while the two techniques involve similar clinical safety and extent of resection. These results should be considered preliminary since they are based on a relatively small number of controlled trials, most of which were non-randomized. The findings should be verified in larger, well-designed studies.

Dataset Information

Identification and injury to the inferior hypogastric plexus in nerve-sparing radical hysterectomy.

Publications

Identification and injury to the inferior hypogastric plexus in nerve-sparing radical hysterectomy.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets