Surgical and oncologic outcomes between laparoscopic and radical abdominal hysterectomy for IB1-IIA2 cervical cancer

Survival outcomes of minimally invasive versus open radical hysterectomy in patients with early-stage IB1 to IIA2 cervical cancer: A single-center retrospective study

“…Other retrospective studies have also supported the finding that MIS was associated with poor DFS when the tumor was >2 cm. [8,9] Our study showed that MIS was associated with poor survival outcomes regarding both DFS and OS, which is consistent with the results of the LACC trial. The mean tumor size in this study was >2 cm in both groups, without significant differences between the groups.…”

“…In our study, MIS was an independent poor prognostic factor for survival outcomes in patients with stage IB1 to IIA2 cervical cancer. Several studies [6,9,13] have explained the potential reasons for the inferior survival outcomes of minimally invasive radical hysterectomy in patients with early cervical cancer. These include the use of a uterine manipulator, insufflation of CO 2 gas, intracorporeal colpotomy, and steep Trendelenburg position.…”

“…[11] Quan et al showed that laparoscopic surgery with adjuvant therapy in patients with stage IB1 to IIA cervical cancer had poorer DFS and OS compared with open surgery with adjuvant therapy, whereas there were no significant differences in the DFS and OS of patients without adjuvant therapy regardless of the surgical approach. [9] Kim et al indicated that adjuvant radiotherapy following radical hysterectomy significantly reduced the rate of recurrence (adjusted HR: 241; 95% CI: 082-0.709; P = .010) in patients with stage IBI to IIA cervical cancer with intermediate-risk factors, whereas patients who underwent MIS did not show a positive effect of adjuvant radiotherapy. [12] In our study, patients who underwent open surgery significantly received more adjuvant therapies, especially adjuvant radiotherapy.…”