Dataset Information

Minimally invasive surgery versus laparotomy for radical hysterectomy in the management of early-stage cervical cancer: Survival outcomes.

ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVE:To compare oncologic and perioperative outcomes in patients who underwent minimally invasive surgery (MIS) compared to laparotomy for newly diagnosed early-stage cervical carcinoma. METHODS:We retrospectively identified patients who underwent radical hysterectomy for stage IA1 with lymphovascular invasion (LVI), IA2, or IB1 cervical carcinoma at our institution from 1/2007-12/2017. Clinicopathologic characteristics and surgical and oncologic survival outcomes were compared using appropriate statistical testing. Multivariable Cox regression analysis was used to control for potential confounders. RESULTS:We identified 196 evaluable cases-117 MIS (106 robotic [90.6%]) and 79 laparotomy cases. Cohorts had similar age, BMI, substage, histologic subtype, clinical and pathologic tumor size, positive margins, and presence of LVI. The MIS group had more cases with no residual tumor in the hysterectomy (24.8% vs. 10.1%, P = 0.01). The laparotomy group had more cases with positive nodes (29.1% vs. 17.1%, P = 0.046) and more patients who received adjuvant therapy (53.2% vs. 33.3%, P = 0.006). Median follow-up was ~4 years. Five-year disease-free survival (DFS) rates were 87.0% in the MIS group and 86.6% in the laparotomy group (P = 0.92); 5-year disease-specific survival (DSS) rates were 96.5% and 93.9%, respectively (P = 0.93); and 5-year overall survival (OS) rates were 96.5% and 87.4%, respectively (P = 0.15). MIS was not associated with DFS, DSS, or OS on multivariable regression analysis. The rate of postoperative complications was significantly lower in the MIS cohort (11.1% vs. 20.3%; P = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS:MIS radical hysterectomy for cervical carcinoma did not confer worse oncologic outcomes in our single-center and concurrent series of patients with early-stage cervical carcinoma.

SUBMITTER: Brandt B

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7056548 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Minimally invasive surgery versus laparotomy for radical hysterectomy in the management of early-stage cervical cancer: Survival outcomes.

Brandt Benny B Sioulas Vasileios V Basaran Derman D Kuhn Theresa T LaVigne Katherine K Gardner Ginger J GJ Sonoda Yukio Y Chi Dennis S DS Long Roche Kara C KC Mueller Jennifer J JJ Jewell Elizabeth L EL Broach Vance A VA Zivanovic Oliver O Abu-Rustum Nadeem R NR Leitao Mario M MM

Gynecologic oncology 20200107 3

<h4>Objective</h4>To compare oncologic and perioperative outcomes in patients who underwent minimally invasive surgery (MIS) compared to laparotomy for newly diagnosed early-stage cervical carcinoma.<h4>Methods</h4>We retrospectively identified patients who underwent radical hysterectomy for stage IA1 with lymphovascular invasion (LVI), IA2, or IB1 cervical carcinoma at our institution from 1/2007-12/2017. Clinicopathologic characteristics and surgical and oncologic survival outcomes were compar ...[more]

PMID: 31918996

Similar Datasets

Project description:Study objectiveThe findings of previous studies have been inconsistent as to whether benign hysterectomy via minimally invasive laparoscopic surgery increases the risk of vesicoureteral injury when compared with laparotomy. The objectives of our study were to (1) examine the rate of vesicoureteral injury on benign hysterectomy by the surgical approach and (2) compare the risk of vesicoureteral injury specifically between minimally invasive laparoscopic and abdominal hysterectomy on a populational level.DesignRetrospective population-based observational study.SettingThe National Inpatient Sample.PatientsA total of 501 110 women who had undergone hysterectomy for benign gynecologic disease between January 2012 and September 2015 were included as follows: total abdominal hysterectomy (TAH, n = 284 365 [56.7%]), total laparoscopic hysterectomy (TLH, n = 60 410 [12.1%]), abdominal supracervical hysterectomy (Abd-SCH, n = 55 655 [11.1%]), laparoscopic-assisted vaginal hysterectomy (LAVH, n = 45 620 [9.1%]), total vaginal hysterectomy (TVH, n = 34 865 [7.0%]), and laparoscopic supracervical hysterectomy (LSC-SCH, n = 20 195 [4.0%]).InterventionsA comprehensive risk assessment for vesicoureteral injury by hysterectomy mode was performed, adjusting for patient demographics and gynecologic disease types. Propensity score inverse probability of treatment weighing was used to compare (1) TLH versus TAH and (2) LSC-SCH versus Abd-SCH with generalized estimating equations. In a sensitivity analysis, gynecologic disease-specific injury risk and vaginal route-specific injury risk (LAVH vs TVH) were assessed.Measurements and main resultsVesicoureteral injury was reported in 1045 (0.21%) women overall. LAVH (0.28%) had the highest bladder injury rate, whereas LSC-SCH had the lowest (0.10%) (p <.001). TLH (0.13%) had the highest ureteral injury rate, whereas TAH had the lowest (0.04%) (p <.001). In propensity score inverse probability of treatment weighing models, compared with TAH, TLH was associated with an increased risk of ureteral injury (odds ratio [OR] 3.95, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.03-7.67, p <.001) but not bladder injury (OR 1.04, 95% CI 0.57-1.90, p = .897). Risk of ureteral injury was particularly high when TLH was performed for endometriosis (OR 6.15, 95% CI 1.18-31.9, p = .031) or for uterine myoma (OR 4.15, 95% CI 2.13-8.11, p <.001). In contrast, for supracervical or vaginal hysterectomy, minimally invasive laparoscopic approaches were not associated with an increased risk of vesicoureteral injury (LSC-SCH vs Abd-SCH: OR 0.62, 95% CI 0.19-1.98, p = .419; LAVH vs TVH: OR 1.21, 95% CI 0.63-2.33, p = .564).ConclusionThe risk of vesicoureteral injury on benign hysterectomy is low overall regardless of hysterotomy modalities but varies widely with the surgical approach. Compared with TAH, TLH may be associated with an increased risk of ureteral injury.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Minimally invasive surgery was adopted as an alternative to laparotomy (open surgery) for radical hysterectomy in patients with early-stage cervical cancer before high-quality evidence regarding its effect on survival was available. We sought to determine the effect of minimally invasive surgery on all-cause mortality among women undergoing radical hysterectomy for cervical cancer. METHODS:We performed a cohort study involving women who underwent radical hysterectomy for stage IA2 or IB1 cervical cancer during the 2010-2013 period at Commission on Cancer-accredited hospitals in the United States. The study used inverse probability of treatment propensity-score weighting. We also conducted an interrupted time-series analysis involving women who underwent radical hysterectomy for cervical cancer during the 2000-2010 period, using the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results program database. RESULTS:In the primary analysis, 1225 of 2461 women (49.8%) underwent minimally invasive surgery. Women treated with minimally invasive surgery were more often white, privately insured, and from ZIP Codes with higher socioeconomic status, had smaller, lower-grade tumors, and were more likely to have received a diagnosis later in the study period than women who underwent open surgery. Over a median follow-up of 45 months, the 4-year mortality was 9.1% among women who underwent minimally invasive surgery and 5.3% among those who underwent open surgery (hazard ratio, 1.65; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.22 to 2.22; P=0.002 by the log-rank test). Before the adoption of minimally invasive radical hysterectomy (i.e., in the 2000-2006 period), the 4-year relative survival rate among women who underwent radical hysterectomy for cervical cancer remained stable (annual percentage change, 0.3%; 95% CI, -0.1 to 0.6). The adoption of minimally invasive surgery coincided with a decline in the 4-year relative survival rate of 0.8% (95% CI, 0.3 to 1.4) per year after 2006 (P=0.01 for change of trend). CONCLUSIONS:In an epidemiologic study, minimally invasive radical hysterectomy was associated with shorter overall survival than open surgery among women with stage IA2 or IB1 cervical carcinoma. (Funded by the National Cancer Institute and others.).

Project description:BackgroundA recent trial demonstrated decreased survival in women with early-stage cervical cancer who underwent radical hysterectomy via minimally invasive surgery compared with laparotomy; however, outcomes following trachelectomy have yet to be studied.ObjectiveTo examine trends, characteristics, and survival of reproductive-aged women with early-stage cervical cancer who underwent minimally invasive trachelectomy.Study designThis is a retrospective study examining the National Cancer Database between 2010 and 2015. Women aged <50 years who underwent trachelectomy for stage IA2-IB cervical cancer were grouped by mode of surgery. Clinicopathologic characteristics and outcomes were compared between minimally invasive surgery and laparotomy groups.ResultsA total of 246 women were included, 144 (58.5%, 95% confidence interval, 52.4%-64.7%) of whom had trachelectomy with a minimally invasive surgery approach. Median age was similar between the minimally invasive surgery and laparotomy groups (median, 31 vs 29 years, P = .20). There was a significant increase in the use of minimally invasive surgery from 29.3% in 2010 to 75.0% in 2015 (P < .001). Specifically, minimally invasive surgery became the dominant approach for trachelectomy by year 2011 (54.8%). Hospitals registered in the West (75.0% vs 25.0%) were more likely, whereas those registered in the Midwest (46.9% vs 53.1%) were less likely, to perform minimally invasive surgery (P = .02). Median follow-up was 37 months (interquartile range, 23-51) for the minimally invasive surgery group and 40 months (interquartile range, 26-67) for the laparotomy group. During follow-up, there were 11 (5.3%) deaths, 4 (3.5%) in the minimally invasive surgery group and 7 (7.6%) in the laparotomy group (P = .25).ConclusionMinimally invasive surgery has become the dominant modality for trachelectomy in reproductive-aged women with stage IA2-IB cervical cancer after year 2011. Survival of women with stage IA2-IB cervical cancer who underwent trachelectomy is generally good regardless of surgical modality. Although our study showed no difference in survival between the minimally invasive surgery and laparotomy approaches, effects of MIS on survival remain unknown and further study is warranted.

Project description:ObjectiveMinimally invasive radical hysterectomy (MIS-RH) for early-stage cervical cancer is a relatively new surgical procedure with increased utilization in the mid-/late-2000s. This study examined the association between hospital surgical volume for MIS-RH and perioperative outcomes for early-stage cervical cancer in the period of early adoption.MethodsThis population-based retrospective study queried the National Inpatient Sample from 2007 to 2011. Cervical cancer cases treated with MIS-RH were examined (n = 2202 from 163 hospitals). Annualized hospital surgical volume was defined as the average number of procedures performed per year in which at least one case was performed. Characteristics and outcomes related to MIS-RH use were assessed. The comparator cohort included RH by laparotomy (Open-RH; n = 11,187 from 405 hospitals).ResultsAmong MIS-RH-offering centers, 42.3% had average 1 case/year and surgical volume of >4 cases/year represented the top decile. When stratified by MIS-RH types, on average 31.3 centers performed robotic-assisted approach per year versus 11.5 centers for the traditional approach. Small bed capacity centers were most likely to perform robotic-assisted RH (adjusted-odds ratio 4.07, P < 0.001). In the traditional MIS-RH group, higher hospital surgical volume was associated with lower surgical morbidity (P = 0.025) whereas in the robotic-assisted approach higher hospital surgical volume was associated with higher surgical morbidity (P < 0.001). In the Open-RH cohort, higher hospital surgical volume was significantly associated with decreased surgical morbidity and mortality (both, P < 0.001).ConclusionIn the mid-/late-2000s, MIS-RH surgical volume was modest in the United States. Small bed capacity centers adopted robotic-assisted MIS-RH more frequently, and there was a statistically significant association of increased perioperative complications among higher volume centers. In contrast, higher surgical volume was associated with improved perioperative outcomes with the traditional MIS-RH and open-RH approaches.

Dataset Information

Minimally invasive surgery versus laparotomy for radical hysterectomy in the management of early-stage cervical cancer: Survival outcomes.

Publications

Minimally invasive surgery versus laparotomy for radical hysterectomy in the management of early-stage cervical cancer: Survival outcomes.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets