IntroductionRecent evidence has shown adverse oncological outcomes when minimally invasive surgery is used in early-stage cervical cancer. The objective of this study was to compare disease-free survival in patients that had undergone radical hysterectomy and pelvic lymphadenectomy, either by laparoscopy or laparotomy.MethodsWe performed a multicenter, retrospective cohort study of patients with cervical cancer stage IA1 with lymph-vascular invasion, IA2, and IB1 (FIGO 2009 classification), between January 1, 2006 to December 31, 2017, at seven cancer centers from six countries. We included squamous, adenocarcinoma, and adenosquamous histologies. We used an inverse probability of treatment weighting based on propensity score to construct a weighted cohort of women, including predictor variables selected a priori with the possibility of confounding the relationship between the surgical approach and survival. We estimated the HR for all-cause mortality after radical hysterectomy with weighted Cox proportional hazard models.ResultsA total of 1379 patients were included in the final analysis, with 681 (49.4%) operated by laparoscopy and 698 (50.6%) by laparotomy. There were no differences regarding the surgical approach in the rates of positive vaginal margins, deep stromal invasion, and lymphovascular space invasion. Median follow-up was 52.1 months (range, 0.8–201.2) in the laparoscopic group and 52.6 months (range, 0.4–166.6) in the laparotomy group. Women who underwent laparoscopic radical hysterectomy had a lower rate of disease-free survival compared with the laparotomy group (4-year rate, 88.7% vs 93.0%; HR for recurrence or death from cervical cancer 1.64; 95% CI 1.09–2.46; P=0.02). In sensitivity analyzes, after adjustment for adjuvant treatment, radical hysterectomy by laparoscopy compared with laparotomy was associated with increased hazards of recurrence or death from cervical cancer (HR 1.7; 95% CI 1.13 to 2.57; P=0.01) and death for any cause (HR 2.14; 95% CI 1.05–4.37; P=0.03).ConclusionIn this retrospective multicenter study, laparoscopy was associated with worse disease-free survival, compared to laparotomy.

PURPOSE Locally advanced cervical cancer may present with uncontrollable vaginal bleeding in up to 70% of cases. Pelvic vessel embolization has been used as an urgent maneuver for achieving fast hemostatic control. This report describes outcomes of selective pelvic vessel embolization in patients with severe bleeding due to a locally advanced cervical cancer. METHODS In this retrospective study, technical aspects, clinical variables, and bleeding-related morbidity were described. The frequency of recurrent disease and the vital status at 1 year of follow-up were determined. Analysis was performed with statistical software R, version 3.6.2. The setting was Instituto Nacional de Cancerología- Bogotá, Colombia, between January 2009 and July 2017. RESULTS A total of 47 patients were included. Median age was 44 years (range, 26-70 years). The pre-embolization median hemoglobin level was 7.9 g/dL (range, 5.0-11.3 g/dL). Blood transfusions were administered to 41 women (87.2%). Bleeding control was achieved in 95.7% of cases in the first 24 hours after the embolization. There were no major complications. In 17 cases (36.2%), minor complications were reported; the most common was pelvic pain. In 17.1% of cases, a second embolization was required. After 12 months of follow-up, 27.7% of patients were alive without disease, 44.7% were alive with disease, and 25.5% of them have died of cervical cancer progression. CONCLUSION Selective pelvic vessel embolization is a useful alternative in patients with locally advanced cervical cancer and life-threatening bleeding. Its impact on recurrent disease and death due to oncologic cause is not clear.

abnormal vaginal bleeding requiring intervention had no statistical difference between VP and WVP patients group (p=0.3074) as other complications as well (table 1). Median of related days of vaginal bleeding after the procedure were 7.4 days (SD 8.75) in VP group and 7.34days (SD 8.52) in WVP group, with no statistical difference (p=0.912). Conclusions Insert a vaginal pack or not, after LEEP, do not affect the number of postoperative gynecologic intervention due to vaginal bleeding or the amount of postoperative bleeding days. Previous pregnancies, hormonal status, cytology or LEEP specimen characteristics did not affect the disclosure. We also could not find any risk factor associated to abnormal bleeding. Based on that, the use of vaginal pack can be omitted with no further complications.