Search

Purpose: The aim of the study was to compare recurrence-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS) of patients with early stage cervical cancer in dependence of surgical approach and treatment center., Patients and Methods: A population-based cohort study including women with early stage IA1-IIB2 cervical cancer treated by radical hysterectomy between January 2010 and December 2015 was performed., Results: The median follow-up time was 5.6 years. After exclusions, 413 patients were eligible for analysis: 111 (26.9%) underwent minimal-invasive surgery (MIS) and 302 (73.1%) open surgery. Both treatment groups were well balanced regarding the clinical and pathological characteristics. The mean age of the patients was 51.0 years. MIS was associated with improved RFS and OS compared with the open surgery. The 5-year RFS rates were 89.2% in the MIS group and 73.4% in the open surgery group (p = 0.004). The 5-year OS rates were 93.7% in the MIS group and 81.8% in the open surgery group (p = 0.016). After adjustment for other prognostic covariates, the MIS was further associated with improved RFS (HR = 0.45, 95% CI 0.24-0.86; p = 0.015) but not with OS. Nevertheless, after adjustment for treatment center, the surgical approach was not associated with significant difference in RFS (HR = 0.61, 95% CI 0.31-1.19; p = 0.143). Overall survival of patients treated in university cancer centers was significantly increased compared to patients treated in non-university cancer centers. The treatment center remains a strong prognostic factor regarding RFS (HR = 0.49, 95% CI 0.28-0.83; p = 0.009) and OS (HR = 0.50, 95% CI 0.26-0.94; p = 0.031)., Conclusions: The treatment center but not the surgical approach was associated with the survival of patients treated with radical hysterectomy for early stage cervical cancer., (© 2021. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH, DE part of Springer Nature.)

Background: External beam radiation therapy (EBRT) with concomitant chemotherapy (cCT) (=RCT) plus intracavitary (±interstitial) brachytherapy (iBT) is standard of care for advanced cervical cancer. The aim of this study was to evaluate morbidity and survival outcome of simple adjuvant hysterectomy (AH) after EBRT/cCT and to compare it with the standard treatment., Patients and Methods: Patients with FIGO stage III cervical cancer were treated with EBRT/cCT and then divided in two groups: group 1 was further treated with standard intracavitary/interstitial BT, while group 2 underwent AH., Results: From 881 women with cervical cancer, 248 were eligible for analysis: 161 received iBT and 87 underwent AH. The median follow-up of the study was 53 months. Clinical and pathological characteristics were well balanced in the two groups. After EBRT/cCT, complete clinical response was observed in 121 (48.8%) of 246 patients. Clinical complete response was observed in 81 (50.3%) of 161 patients in group 1. At 6 weeks after EBRT/cCT, 40 (46.0%) of 87 patients in the surgery group had pathological complete response. Intra- and postoperative complications were observed in 10 (11.5%) of 87 cases. The rates of locoregional recurrence and metastasis were similar in both groups. Progression-free (PFS) and disease-specific overall survival (DOS) for these patients were similar between the control and surgery group. Interestingly, PFS and DOS were significantly improved by AH for the patients with residual tumor., Conclusion: AH could improve survival in patients with residual disease after RCT and is characterized by a low complication rate.

Objective: Our goal was to compare postoperative pain and analgesic requirements regarding closure and non-closure of the peritoneum in women undergoing laparoscopic supracervical hysterectomy (LSH)., Study Design: A prospective cohort study was designed to investigate the impact of peritoneal closure for LSH. Postoperative pain was measured by a visual analogue scale (VAS) and analgesic requirements were assessed. Intra- and postoperative complications and operative time were recorded., Results: A total of 104 patients were enrolled. Fifty-two (50 %) women underwent a LSH with peritoneal closure and 52 (50 %) underwent LSH without closure. The baseline characteristics were well balanced between the groups except for age; women undergoing LSH without peritoneal closure were significantly younger (p < 0.008, t test). The median operative time was 53 (26-105) minutes for LSH with peritoneal closure and 44 (24-83) minutes for LSH without peritoneal closure, a median reduction of 9 minutes (p = 0.007). No differences were found in uterine weight, intra- and post-operative complications, median haemoglobin drop or time in hospital when contrasting both groups. Both groups had similar VAS-pain scores and needed similar analgesic therapies., Conclusions: The peritoneal closure at LSH provides no short-term postoperative advantages over a non-closure approach, and it prolongs the operative time and anaesthetic exposure. Our data suggest that peritoneal closure is not necessary in LSH.