{"title":"Outcomes and patterns of recurrence of robot‑assisted or laparoscopic radical hysterectomy in early‑stage cervical cancer.","authors":"Masako Ishikawa, Kentaro Nakayama, Tomoka Ishibashi, Hitomi Yamashita, Seiya Sato, Sultana Razia, Satoru Kyo","doi":"10.3892/mco.2025.2838","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The present study aimed to evaluate the surgical outcomes and prognosis of minimally invasive surgery (MIS), including robot-assisted radical hysterectomy (RARH) and laparoscopic radical hysterectomy (LRH), and open radical hysterectomy (ORH) for the treatment of early stage cervical cancer. A total of 43 patients were enrolled into the ORH group, 14 patients into the LRH group and 21 patients into the RARH group, and the patients were followed up for ≥3 years. Age, body mass index, International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics 2008 stage, histology, tumor size, lymphovascular space invasion, lymph node metastasis, number of dissected lymph nodes, operative duration, estimated blood loss, hospitalization duration and complications were reviewed. On follow-up, 16.3% of relapses (7/43) and 11.6% of deaths (5/43) occurred in the ORH group. In the LRH group, 14.3% of patients relapsed (2/14) and no deaths were reported; however, in the RARH group, 33.3% of patients relapsed and 9.5% died (2/21). In patients treated with RARH, >50% of recurrences occurred in distant lesions because of metastasis. No significant difference was found in patient prognosis between the three groups. The difference in 3-year recurrence between the MIS and ORH groups was not statistically significant (MIS vs. ORH, 74.3 vs. 83.7%; log-rank P=0.253). In addition, there was no recurrence in patients with stage IB1 cervical cancer in the RARH group. LRH and RARH were superior to ORH with regard to surgical outcomes, such as estimated blood loss, and therefore may be considered a safe and feasible alternative to ORH. However, RARH would not be an appropriate surgical approach in patients with large tumors and parametrial invasion. In the future, the ideal indications for each surgical procedure should be reassessed, and the significance of the relationship between the difficulty of surgery, such as in cases of bulky tumor, parametrium invasion and vaginal invasion, and disease recurrence should be discussed. In conclusion, MIS could be safe and useful if proper case selection is performed.</p>","PeriodicalId":18737,"journal":{"name":"Molecular and clinical oncology","volume":"22 5","pages":"43"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11959221/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Molecular and clinical oncology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3892/mco.2025.2838","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/5/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
The present study aimed to evaluate the surgical outcomes and prognosis of minimally invasive surgery (MIS), including robot-assisted radical hysterectomy (RARH) and laparoscopic radical hysterectomy (LRH), and open radical hysterectomy (ORH) for the treatment of early stage cervical cancer. A total of 43 patients were enrolled into the ORH group, 14 patients into the LRH group and 21 patients into the RARH group, and the patients were followed up for ≥3 years. Age, body mass index, International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics 2008 stage, histology, tumor size, lymphovascular space invasion, lymph node metastasis, number of dissected lymph nodes, operative duration, estimated blood loss, hospitalization duration and complications were reviewed. On follow-up, 16.3% of relapses (7/43) and 11.6% of deaths (5/43) occurred in the ORH group. In the LRH group, 14.3% of patients relapsed (2/14) and no deaths were reported; however, in the RARH group, 33.3% of patients relapsed and 9.5% died (2/21). In patients treated with RARH, >50% of recurrences occurred in distant lesions because of metastasis. No significant difference was found in patient prognosis between the three groups. The difference in 3-year recurrence between the MIS and ORH groups was not statistically significant (MIS vs. ORH, 74.3 vs. 83.7%; log-rank P=0.253). In addition, there was no recurrence in patients with stage IB1 cervical cancer in the RARH group. LRH and RARH were superior to ORH with regard to surgical outcomes, such as estimated blood loss, and therefore may be considered a safe and feasible alternative to ORH. However, RARH would not be an appropriate surgical approach in patients with large tumors and parametrial invasion. In the future, the ideal indications for each surgical procedure should be reassessed, and the significance of the relationship between the difficulty of surgery, such as in cases of bulky tumor, parametrium invasion and vaginal invasion, and disease recurrence should be discussed. In conclusion, MIS could be safe and useful if proper case selection is performed.
本研究旨在评估微创手术(MIS)治疗早期宫颈癌的手术效果和预后,包括机器人辅助根治性子宫切除术(RARH)和腹腔镜根治性子宫切除术(LRH)以及开放式根治性子宫切除术(ORH)。ORH组43例,LRH组14例,RARH组21例,随访时间≥3年。回顾年龄、体重指数、2008年国际妇产科联合会分期、组织学、肿瘤大小、淋巴血管间隙侵犯、淋巴结转移、淋巴结清扫数、手术时间、估计出血量、住院时间和并发症。在随访中,16.3%的复发(7/43)和11.6%的死亡(5/43)发生在ORH组。在LRH组,14.3%的患者复发(2/14),无死亡报告;然而,在RARH组中,33.3%的患者复发,9.5%死亡(2/21)。在接受RARH治疗的患者中,由于转移,bb50 %的复发发生在远处病变。三组患者预后无明显差异。MIS组与ORH组3年复发率差异无统计学意义(MIS vs ORH, 74.3 vs 83.7%;log-rank P = 0.253)。此外,RARH组IB1期宫颈癌患者无复发。LRH和RARH在手术结果方面优于ORH,例如估计的出血量,因此可以被认为是ORH的安全可行的替代方案。然而,对于大肿瘤和伴侧侵犯的患者,RARH不是合适的手术入路。今后,应重新评估每种手术的理想适应症,并讨论手术难度(如体积较大的肿瘤、参数侵犯和阴道侵犯)与疾病复发之间的关系的意义。总之,如果进行适当的病例选择,MIS可以是安全和有用的。