An Australian, single-centre study of surgical management outcomes for early-stage cervical cancer.
cervical cancer
laparotomy
minimally invasive surgery
recurrence
Journal
The Australian & New Zealand journal of obstetrics & gynaecology
ISSN: 1479-828X
Titre abrégé: Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol
Pays: Australia
ID NLM: 0001027
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
02 2021
02 2021
Historique:
received:
11
11
2019
accepted:
22
06
2020
pubmed:
12
11
2020
medline:
2
3
2021
entrez:
11
11
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
The Laparoscopic Approach to Cervical Cancer (LACC) trial is the first phase III randomised, multicentred trial to compare oncologic outcomes associated with open radical hysterectomy vs minimally invasive surgery (MIS) for treatment of early cervical cancer. To evaluate our surgical experience in patients with early cervical cancer. The Lifehouse Gynaecologic Oncology database was queried based upon the eligibility criteria of the LACC study and included all FIGO 2009 stage (1A1 with lymph vascular space invasion, 1A2, 1B1) cervical cancer women from 2008-2018. Patients were also included in our study if they had abdominal radical trachelectomy (ART), laparoscopic radical hysterectomy (TLRH) and robotic radical trachelectomy (RRT). Forty-six women were identified with four exclusions. Thirty-seven women had stage 1B1 disease, 24 had a squamous cell carcinoma, 15 had an adenocarcinoma and three had an adenosquamous carcinoma of the cervix. Of the 42 eligible patients, 32 underwent an open abdominal approach (26 total abdominal radical hysterectomy (TARH), six ART) and ten a MIS approach (nine TLRH and one RRT) with a mean follow-up of 4.8 years. All 42 women had a pelvic lymph node dissection, eight women had nodal metastases and 16 patients received adjuvant chemoradiation. Two of the nine women in the laparoscopic radical hysterectomy group had a recurrence. Both had adenocarcinoma, stage 1B1 disease. There were no recurrences in the TARH group or radical trachelectomy groups. Our data, albeit limited in number, have reflected the results of the LACC trial that MIS was associated with a lower disease-free survival than open radical hysterectomy.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
The Laparoscopic Approach to Cervical Cancer (LACC) trial is the first phase III randomised, multicentred trial to compare oncologic outcomes associated with open radical hysterectomy vs minimally invasive surgery (MIS) for treatment of early cervical cancer.
AIM
To evaluate our surgical experience in patients with early cervical cancer.
METHODS AND MATERIALS
The Lifehouse Gynaecologic Oncology database was queried based upon the eligibility criteria of the LACC study and included all FIGO 2009 stage (1A1 with lymph vascular space invasion, 1A2, 1B1) cervical cancer women from 2008-2018. Patients were also included in our study if they had abdominal radical trachelectomy (ART), laparoscopic radical hysterectomy (TLRH) and robotic radical trachelectomy (RRT).
RESULTS
Forty-six women were identified with four exclusions. Thirty-seven women had stage 1B1 disease, 24 had a squamous cell carcinoma, 15 had an adenocarcinoma and three had an adenosquamous carcinoma of the cervix. Of the 42 eligible patients, 32 underwent an open abdominal approach (26 total abdominal radical hysterectomy (TARH), six ART) and ten a MIS approach (nine TLRH and one RRT) with a mean follow-up of 4.8 years. All 42 women had a pelvic lymph node dissection, eight women had nodal metastases and 16 patients received adjuvant chemoradiation. Two of the nine women in the laparoscopic radical hysterectomy group had a recurrence. Both had adenocarcinoma, stage 1B1 disease. There were no recurrences in the TARH group or radical trachelectomy groups.
CONCLUSION
Our data, albeit limited in number, have reflected the results of the LACC trial that MIS was associated with a lower disease-free survival than open radical hysterectomy.
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
123-127Informations de copyright
© 2020 The Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists.
Références
Australian Institute of Health and Welfare 2019. Estimated incidence and mortality in 2019 by sex. In: Cancer in Australia 2019. Cancer series no.119. Cat. no. CAN 123. Canberra: AIHW, 2019.
Kehoe S. Treatments for gynaecological cancers. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol 2006; 20: 985-1000.
Kruijdenberg CBM, Van Den Einden LCG, Hendriks JCM et al. Robot-assisted versus total laparoscopic radical hysterectomy in early cervical cancer, a review. Gynecol Oncol 2011; 120: 334-339.
Renato S, Mohamed M, Serena S et al. Robot-assisted radical hysterectomy for cervical cancer: review of surgical and oncological outcomes. ISRN Obstet Gynecol. 2013;2013:305175. ISRN Obstet Gynecol.
Ramirez PT, Soliman PT, Schmeler KM et al. Laparoscopic and robotic techniques for radical hysterectomy in patients with early-stage cervical cancer. Gynecol Oncol 2008; 110(3): S21-S24.
Wang YZ, Deng L, Xu HC et al. Laparoscopy versus laparotomy for the management of early stage cervical cancer. BMC Cancer 2015; 15: 928.
Cao T, Feng Y, Huang Q et al. Prognostic and safety roles in laparoscopy versus abdominal radical hysterectomy in cervical cancer: a meta-analysis. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A 2015; 25: 990-998.
Chen Y, Xu H, Li Y et al. The outcome of laparoscopic radical hysterectomy and lymphadenectomy for cervical cancer: a prospective analysis of 295 patients. Ann Surg Oncol 2008; 15: 2847-2855.
Pergialiotis V, Christakis D, Thomakos N et al. Laparoscopically assisted vaginal radical hysterectomy: systematic review of the literature. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 2013; 20: 745-753.
Ramirez PT, Frumovitz M, Pareja R et al. Minimally invasive vs abdominal radical hysterectomy for cervical cancer. NEMJ 2018; 379: 1895-1904.
Carter J. Letter to Editor. Safety of laparoscopy in cervical cancer. ANZJOG 2019; 59: E9.
Kooby DA. Laparoscopic surgery for cancer: historical, theoretical, and technical considerations. Oncology (Williston Park, N.Y.) 2006; 20: 917-927.
Puntambekar SP, Patil AM, Rayate NV et al. A novel technique of uterine manipulation in laparoscopic pelvic oncosurgical procedures: "the uterine hitch technique". Minim Invasive Surg 2010; 2010: 836027.
Yuan P, Liu Z, Qi J et al. Laparoscopic radical hysterectomy with enclosed colpotomy and without the use of uterine manipulator for early-stage cervical cancer. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 2019; 26(6): 1193-1198.
Rakowski JA, Tran TAN, Ahmad S et al. Does a uterine manipulator affect cervical cancer pathology or identification of lymph vascular space involvement? Gynecol Oncol 2012; 127: 98-101.
Lopes AG Jr, Rodrigues CJ, Lopes LH et al. Differences in tumour growth, tumour cell proliferation and immune function after laparoscopy and laparotomy in an animal model. HPB (Oxford) 2001; 3: 213-217.
Advisory notice to customers, revised instructions for use (IFU) for uterine manipulators, The OR Company 9th October 2019.
Millo P, Rispoli C, Rocco N et al. Laparoscopic surgery for colon cancer. Ann Gastroenterol 2013; 26: 198-203.
Paraskeva Pa, Ridgway Pf, Jones T et al. Laparoscopic environmental changes during surgery enhance the invasive potential of tumours. Tumor Biol 2005; 26(2): 94-102.
Fondrinier E, Boisdron-Celle M, Chassevent G, Lorimier EG. Experimental assessment of tumor growth and dissemination of a microscopic peritoneal carcinomatosis after CO2 peritoneal insufflation or laparotomy. Surg Endosc 2001; 15: 843-848.