Robotic versus vaginal radical trachelectomy for reproductive-aged patients with early-stage cervical carcinoma: A multi-center cohort study.

BACKGROUND

A randomized non-inferiority trial showed worse survival in women with early-stage cervical cancer treated with radical hysterectomy by minimally invasive approach compared to laparotomy; the impact of surgical approach on survival following radical trachelectomy is unknown.

OBJECTIVE

To examine oncologic outcomes in women with early-stage cervical cancer who underwent robotic or vaginal radical trachelectomy at Canadian cancer centers with the highest volumes of radical trachelectomy procedures.

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective multi-centre cohort analysis which includes patients who had surgery between 2006 and 2019. Women with International FIGO 2009 stage IA-IB cervical cancer who underwent radical trachelectomy and lymph node assessment were grouped by surgical approach (vaginal versus robotic surgery).

RESULTS

A total of 197 patients were included from 4 regional referral centres. 56 women underwent robotic radical trachelectomy and 141 underwent vaginal radical trachelectomy. All patients had lymph node assessment by a minimally invasive technique. Median age was 32 years, median tumor size was 12 mm, and median depth of invasion was 5 mm. Recurrence-free survival was 97% in both groups at a median follow-up of 57 months. On multivariable analysis, after adjusting for previously chosen confounders (high risk pathologic criteria, tumor size, and LVSI) there was no statistically significant difference in PFS between the 2 groups (HR 2.1, 95%CI 0.3-7.1, p = 0.5). Tumor size larger than 2 cm (HR 9.4, 95%CI 2.8-26, p = 0.003) was the only variable predictive of recurrence.

CONCLUSION

Survival outcomes were excellent in both cohorts of patients undergoing robotic vs. vaginal radical trachelectomy. The surgical approach was not significantly associated with risk of recurrence after adjusting for clinically important confounders.

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2024. Published by Elsevier Inc.

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

Declaration of competing interest The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: Dr. Allan Covens – Principal investigator for GOG278 trial. Dr. Marie Plante – Principal investigator for SHAPE trial. Funding for this project was through the Intuitive Foundation – This was a competitive grant application of a Physician-initiated project.