-
International Journal of Surgery... Aug 2023Although many studies have reported perioperative complications after radical hysterectomy and pelvic lymph node dissection using robotic and laparoscopic approaches,... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
The incidence of perioperative lymphatic complications after radical hysterectomy and pelvic lymphadenectomy between robotic and laparoscopic approach : a systemic review and meta-analysis.
BACKGROUND
Although many studies have reported perioperative complications after radical hysterectomy and pelvic lymph node dissection using robotic and laparoscopic approaches, the risk of perioperative lymphatic complications has not been well identified. The aim of this meta-analysis is to compare the risks of perioperative lymphatic complications after robotic radical hysterectomy and lymph node dissection (RRHND) with laparoscopic radical hysterectomy and lymph node dissection (LRHND) for early uterine cervical cancer.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
The authors searched the PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, ScienceDirect, and Google Scholar databases for studies published up to July 2022 comparing perioperative lymphatic complications after RRHND and LRHND while treating early uterine cervical cancer. Related articles and bibliographies of relevant studies were also checked. Two reviewers independently performed the data extraction.
RESULTS
A total of 19 eligible clinical trials (15 retrospective studies and 4 prospective studies) comprising 3079 patients were included in this analysis. Only 107 patients (3.48%) had perioperative lymphatic complications, of which the most common was lymphedema ( n =57, 1.85%), followed by symptomatic lymphocele ( n =30, 0.97%), and lymphorrhea ( n =15, 0.49%). When all studies were pooled, the odds ratio for the risk of any lymphatic complication after RRHND compared with LRHND was 1.27 (95% CI: 0.86-1.89; P =0.230). In the subgroup analysis, study quality, country of research, and publication year were not associated with perioperative lymphatic complications.
CONCLUSIONS
A meta-analysis of the available current literature suggests that RRHND is not superior to LRHND in terms of perioperative lymphatic complications.
Topics: Female; Humans; Robotic Surgical Procedures; Uterine Cervical Neoplasms; Retrospective Studies; Incidence; Prospective Studies; Laparoscopy; Lymph Node Excision; Hysterectomy; Postoperative Complications
PubMed: 37195800
DOI: 10.1097/JS9.0000000000000472 -
Gynecologic Oncology Jul 2022Radical hysterectomy and pelvic lymphadenectomy are considered the standard treatment for early-stage cervical cancer (ECC). Minimal Invasive approach to this surgery... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Radical hysterectomy and pelvic lymphadenectomy are considered the standard treatment for early-stage cervical cancer (ECC). Minimal Invasive approach to this surgery has been debated after the publication of a recent prospective randomized trial (Laparoscopic Approach to Cervical Cancer, LACC trial). It demonstrated poorer oncological outcomes for Minimal Invasive Surgery in ECC. However, the reasons are still an open debate. Laparo-Assisted Vaginal Hysterectomy (LAVRH) seems to be a logical option to Abdominal Radical Hysterectomy (ARH). This meta-analysis has the aim to prove it.
METHODS
Following the recommendations in the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement, the Pubmed database and Scopus database were systematically searched in January 2022 since early first publications. No limitation of the country was made. Only English article were considered. The studies containing data about Disease-free Survival (DFS) and/or Overall Survival (OS) and/or Recurrence Rate (RcR) were included.
RESULTS
19 studies fulfilled inclusion criteria. 9 comparative studies were enrolled in meta-analysis. Patients were analyzed concerning surgical approach (Laparo-Assisted Vaginal Radical Hysterectomy) and compared with ARH Oncological outcomes such as DFS and OS were considered. 3196 patiets were included for the review. Meta-analysis of 1988 0f them highlighted a non-statistic significant difference between LARVH and ARH (RR 0.8 [95% CI 0.55-1.16] p = 0.24; I = 0%; p = 0.98). OS was feasible only for 4 studies (RR 0.84 [95% CI 0.23-3.02] p = 0.79; I = 0 p = 0.44). Sub-analysis for tumor with a maximum diameter greater than 2 cm was performed. Data about the type of recurrences (loco-regional vs distant) were collected.
CONCLUSION
LARVH does not appear to affect DFS and OS in ECC patients. The proposed results seem to be comparable with the open approach group of the LACC trial, which today represents the reference standard for the treatment of this pathology. More studies will be needed to test the safety and efficacy of LARVH in the ECC.
Topics: Female; Humans; Hysterectomy; Hysterectomy, Vaginal; Laparoscopy; Neoplasm Staging; Retrospective Studies; Uterine Cervical Neoplasms
PubMed: 35513934
DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2022.04.010 -
BJOG : An International Journal of... Jan 2023Minimally invasive radical hysterectomy has been reported to increase the risk of cancer relapse and death compared with open surgery in women with early-stage cervical... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Minimally invasive radical hysterectomy has been reported to increase the risk of cancer relapse and death compared with open surgery in women with early-stage cervical cancer. The use of a uterine manipulator is considered one of the risk factors.
OBJECTIVES
To investigate whether women with early-stage cervical cancer treated with minimally invasive radical hysterectomy without using uterine manipulator have oncological outcomes similar to those of open surgery.
SEARCH STRATEGY
Searches were performed in MEDLINE, Embase and CENTRAL from their inception until 31 March 2022.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Inclusion criteria were: (1) randomised controlled trials or observational cohort studies published in English, (2) studies comparing minimally invasive radical hysterectomy without using a uterine manipulator with open radical hysterectomy in women with early-stage cervical cancer, and (3) studies comparing survival outcomes.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two authors independently conducted data extraction and assessed study quality. We calculated the hazard ratios (HR) and the 95% confidence intervals (CI) using the inverse variance approach for survival outcome.
MAIN RESULTS
Six observational studies with 2150 women were included. The minimally invasive surgery group had a significantly higher risk of cancer relapse compared with open surgery group (HR 1.55, 95% CI 1.15-2.10).
CONCLUSIONS
Minimally invasive radical hysterectomy without using a uterine manipulator resulted in an inferior recurrence-free survival compared with open radical hysterectomy in the treatment of women with early-stage cervical cancer.
Topics: Female; Humans; Uterine Cervical Neoplasms; Neoplasm Staging; Neoplasm Recurrence, Local; Hysterectomy; Minimally Invasive Surgical Procedures; Retrospective Studies; Laparoscopy
PubMed: 36331008
DOI: 10.1111/1471-0528.17339 -
Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics Aug 2022Radical hysterectomy and pelvic lymphadenectomy is the standard treatment for early cervical cancer. Studies have shown superior oncological outcome for open versus... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Perioperative morbidity of different operative approaches in early cervical carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing minimally invasive versus open radical hysterectomy.
PURPOSE
Radical hysterectomy and pelvic lymphadenectomy is the standard treatment for early cervical cancer. Studies have shown superior oncological outcome for open versus minimal invasive surgery, but peri- and postoperative complication rates were shown vice versa. This meta-analysis evaluates the peri- and postoperative morbidities and complications of robotic and laparoscopic radical hysterectomy compared to open surgery.
METHODS
Embase and Ovid-Medline databases were systematically searched in June 2020 for studies comparing robotic, laparoscopic and open radical hysterectomy. There was no limitation in publication year. Inclusion criteria were set analogue to the LACC trial. Subgroup analyses were performed regarding the operative technique, the study design and the date of publication for the endpoints intra- and postoperative morbidity, estimated blood loss, hospital stay and operation time.
RESULTS
27 studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Five prospective, randomized-control trials were included. Meta-analysis showed no significant difference between robotic radical hysterectomy (RH) and laparoscopic hysterectomy (LH) concerning intra- and perioperative complications. Operation time was longer in both RH (mean difference 44.79 min [95% CI 38.16; 51.42]), and LH (mean difference 20.96 min; [95% CI - 1.30; 43.22]) than in open hysterectomy (AH) but did not lead to a rise of intra- and postoperative complications. Intraoperative morbidity was lower in LH than in AH (RR 0.90 [0.80; 1.02]) as well as in RH compared to AH (0.54 [0.33; 0.88]). Intraoperative morbidity showed no difference between LH and RH (RR 1.29 [0.23; 7.29]). Postoperative morbidity was not different in any approach. Estimated blood loss was lower in both LH (mean difference - 114.34 [- 122.97; - 105.71]) and RH (mean difference - 287.14 [- 392.99; - 181.28]) compared to AH, respectively. Duration of hospital stay was shorter for LH (mean difference - 3.06 [- 3.28; - 2.83]) and RH (mean difference - 3.77 [- 5.10; - 2.44]) compared to AH.
CONCLUSION
Minimally invasive radical hysterectomy appears to be associated with reduced intraoperative morbidity and blood loss and improved reconvalescence after surgery. Besides oncological and surgical factors these results should be considered when counseling patients for radical hysterectomy and underscore the need for new randomized trials.
Topics: Female; Humans; Hysterectomy; Laparoscopy; Morbidity; Postoperative Complications; Prospective Studies; Robotic Surgical Procedures; Uterine Cervical Neoplasms
PubMed: 34625835
DOI: 10.1007/s00404-021-06248-8 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Sep 2022With an estimated 570,000 new cases reported globally in 2018, and increasing numbers of new cases in countries without established human papillomavirus (HPV)... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
With an estimated 570,000 new cases reported globally in 2018, and increasing numbers of new cases in countries without established human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination programmes, cervical cancer is the third most common cancer in women worldwide. The majority of global disease burden (around 85%) is in low-and middle-income countries (LMICs), with estimates of cervical cancer being the second most common cancer in women in such regions. As it commonly affects younger women, cervical cancer has the greatest impact on years of life lost (YLL) and adverse socioeconomic outcomes compared to all other cancers in women. Management of cervical cancer depends on tumour stage. Radical hysterectomy with lymphadenectomy is the standard primary treatment modality for International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) stage (2019) 1B1 to 1B3 disease. However, for larger primary tumours, radical hysterectomy is less commonly recommended. This is mainly due to a high incidence of unfavourable histopathological parameters, which require adjuvant concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) (chemotherapy given with radiotherapy treatment). CCRT is the standard of care and is widely used as first-line treatment for cervical cancer considered to be not curable with surgery alone (i.e.those with locally advanced disease). However, a sizable cohort of women managed with primary CCRT will have residual disease within the cervix following treatment. Debulking' hysterectomy to remove (debulk) the primary tumour in locally advanced disease, prior to CCRT, may be an alternative management strategy, avoiding the potential need for surgery for residual cervical disease following CCRT, which may be more extensive, or have increased morbidity due to CCRT. However, this strategy may subject more women to unnecessary surgery and its inherent risks.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the efficacy and harms of debulking hysterectomy (simple or radical) followed by chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) versus CCRT alone for FIGO (2019) stage IB3/II cervical cancer.
SEARCH METHODS
We systematically searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2021, Issue 4), MEDLINE via Ovid (1946 to 12 April 2021) and Embase via Ovid (1980 to 12 April 2021). We also searched other registers of clinical trials, abstracts of scientific meetings and reference lists up to 12 April 2021.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We searched for randomised controlled trials (RCTs), quasi-RCTs or non-randomised studies (NRSs) comparing debulking hysterectomy followed by CCRT versus CCRT alone for locally advanced FIGO (2019) stage IB3/II cervical malignancy.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We applied Cochrane methodology, with two review authors independently assessing whether potentially relevant studies met the inclusion criteria. We planned to apply standard Cochrane methodological procedures to analyse data and risk of bias.
MAIN RESULTS
We did not find any evidence for or against debulking hysterectomy followed by CCRT versus CCRT alone for FIGO (2019) stage IB3/II cervical cancer. We did not identify any studies assessing the validity of debulking hysterectomy for these women. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There was no evidence for or against debulking hysterectomy followed by CCRT versus CCRT alone for FIGO (2019) stage IB3/II cervical cancer.
Topics: Chemoradiotherapy; Cytoreduction Surgical Procedures; Female; Humans; Hysterectomy; Neoplasm Staging; Neoplasm, Residual; Uterine Cervical Neoplasms
PubMed: 36111784
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD012246.pub2 -
Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics Sep 2021Radical hysterectomy with pelvic lymphadenectomy presents the standard treatment for early cervical cancer. Recently, studies have shown a superior oncological outcome... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Protective operative techniques in radical hysterectomy in early cervical carcinoma and their influence on disease-free and overall survival: a systematic review and meta-analysis of risk groups.
PURPOSE
Radical hysterectomy with pelvic lymphadenectomy presents the standard treatment for early cervical cancer. Recently, studies have shown a superior oncological outcome for open versus minimal invasive surgery, however, the reasons remain to be speculated. This meta-analysis evaluates the outcomes of robotic and laparoscopic hysterectomy compared to open hysterectomy. Risk groups including the use of uterine manipulators or colpotomy were created.
METHODS
Ovid-Medline and Embase databases were systematically searched in June 2020. No limitation in date of publication or country was made. Subgroup analyses were performed regarding the surgical approach and the endpoints OS and DFS.
RESULTS
30 studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Five prospective, randomized-control trials were included. Patients were analyzed concerning the surgical approach [open surgery (AH), laparoscopic surgery (LH), robotic surgery (RH)]. Additionally, three subgroups were created from the LH group: the LH high-risk group (manipulator), intermediate-risk group (no manipulator, intracorporal colpotomy) and LH low-risk group (no manipulator, vaginal colpotomy). Regarding OS, the meta-analysis showed inferiority of LH in total over AH (0.97 [0.96; 0.98]). The OS was significantly higher in LH low risk (0.96 [0.94; 0.98) compared to LH intermediate risk (0.93 [0.91; 0.94]). OS rates were comparable in AH and LH Low-risk group. DFS was higher in the AH group compared to the LH group in general (0.92 [95%-CI 0.88; 0.95] vs. 0.87 [0.82; 0.91]), whereas the application of protective measures (no uterine manipulator in combination with vaginal colpotomy) was associated with increased DFS in laparoscopy (0.91 [0.91; 0.95]).
CONCLUSION
DFS and OS in laparoscopy appear to be depending on surgical technique. Protective operating techniques in laparoscopy result in improved minimal invasive survival.
Topics: Carcinoma, Squamous Cell; Colpotomy; Early Detection of Cancer; Female; Humans; Hysterectomy; Laparoscopy; Minimally Invasive Surgical Procedures; Pregnancy; Uterine Cervical Neoplasms
PubMed: 34021804
DOI: 10.1007/s00404-021-06082-y -
Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics Aug 2021Villoglandular adenocarcinoma (VGA) of the uterine cervix has been classified as a rare subtype of cervical adenocarcinoma with good prognosis. A conservative surgical... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
PURPOSE
Villoglandular adenocarcinoma (VGA) of the uterine cervix has been classified as a rare subtype of cervical adenocarcinoma with good prognosis. A conservative surgical approach is considered feasible. The main risk factor is the presence of other histologic types of cancer. In this largest systematic review to date, we assess oncological outcomes associated with conservative therapy compared to those associated with invasive management in the treatment of stage Ia and Ib VGA.
METHODS
Case series and case reports identified by searching the PubMed database were eligible for inclusion in this review (stage Ia-Ib).
RESULTS
A total of 271 patients were included in our literature review. 54 (20%) patients were treated by "conservative management" (conization, simple hysterectomy, and trachelectomy) and 217 (80%) by "invasive management" (radical hysterectomy ± radiation, hysterectomy, and radiation). Recurrences of disease (RODs) were found in the conservative group in two (4%) cases and in the invasive group in nine (4%) cases. There was no significant difference in disease-free survival (DFS) according to conservative or invasive treatment (p = 0.75). The histology of VGA may be complex with underlying usual adenocarcinoma (UAC) combined with VGA.
CONCLUSION
The excellent prognosis of pure VGA and the young age of the patients may justify the management of this tumor using a less radical procedure. The histological diagnosis of VGA is a challenge, and pretreatment should not be based solely on a simple punch biopsy but rather a conization with wide tumor-free margins.
Topics: Adenocarcinoma; Conservative Treatment; Female; Humans; Hysterectomy; Neoplasm Invasiveness; Neoplasm Recurrence, Local; Pregnancy; Uterine Cervical Neoplasms
PubMed: 34036437
DOI: 10.1007/s00404-021-06077-9 -
American Journal of Obstetrics and... Apr 2021A systematic review was performed to examine the outcomes of simple hysterectomy for women with low-risk, early-stage cervical cancer.
OBJECTIVE
A systematic review was performed to examine the outcomes of simple hysterectomy for women with low-risk, early-stage cervical cancer.
DATA SOURCES
MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched from inception until November 4, 2020.
STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA
Original research reporting recurrence or survival outcomes among women with early-stage cervical cancer (defined as stage IA2 to IB1 disease) who were treated with simple hysterectomy.
METHODS
Data regarding study characteristics, tumor characteristics, other treatment modalities, adjuvant therapy, recurrence, and survival outcomes were analyzed. Studies that reported both simple hysterectomy and radical hysterectomy outcomes were compared in a subgroup analysis. Summary statistics were reported and eligible studies were further analyzed to determine an estimated hazard ratio comparing simple hysterectomy with radical hysterectomy.
RESULTS
A total of 21 studies were included, of which 3 were randomized control trials, 14 retrospective studies, 2 prospective studies, and 2 population-level data sets. The cohort included 2662 women who underwent simple hysterectomy, of which 36.1% had stage IA2 disease and 61.0% stage IB1 disease. Most cases (96.8%) involved tumors of ≤2 cm in size, and 15.4% of cases were lymphovascular space invasion positive. Approximately 71.8% of women who underwent simple hysterectomy had a lymph node assessment, and 30.7% of women underwent adjuvant chemotherapy or radiation. The most common complications described were lymphedema (24%), lymphocysts (22%), and urinary incontinence (18.5%). The total death rate for studies that reported deaths was 5.5%. By stage, there was a 2.7% mortality rate among IA2 disease and a 7.3% mortality rate among IB1 disease. Of note, 18 studies reported outcomes for both simple and radical hysterectomy, with a 4.5% death rate in the radical hysterectomy group and a 5.8% death rate in the simple hysterectomy group. Estimated and reported hazard ratio demonstrated no significant association for mortality between radical and nonradical surgeries for IA2 disease but potentially increased risk of mortality among IB1 disease. All studies had a moderate to high risk of bias, including the 3 randomized control trials. Level of evidence was limited to III to IV.
CONCLUSION
The use of less radical surgery for women with stage IA2 and small volume IB1 cervical cancers appears favorable. However, there is concern that simple hysterectomy in women with stage IB1 tumors may adversely impact survival. Overall, the quality of studies available is modest, limiting the conclusions that can be drawn from the available literature.
Topics: Female; Humans; Hysterectomy; Postoperative Complications; Uterine Cervical Neoplasms
PubMed: 33306971
DOI: 10.1016/j.ajog.2020.11.041 -
International Journal of Gynecological... Dec 2022To assess the incidence of peritoneal carcinomatosis in patients undergoing minimally invasive or open radical hysterectomy for cervical cancer. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
To assess the incidence of peritoneal carcinomatosis in patients undergoing minimally invasive or open radical hysterectomy for cervical cancer.
METHODS
The MEDLINE (accessed through Ovid), Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Clinical Trials, and Scopus databases were searched for articles published from inception up to April 2022. Articles published in English were considered. The included studies reported on patients with International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) 2009 stage IA-IIA squamous cell carcinoma, adenocarcinoma, and/or adenosquamous carcinoma of the cervix who underwent primary surgery. Studies had to report at least one case of peritoneal carcinomatosis as a recurrence pattern, and only studies comparing recurrence after minimally invasive surgery versus open surgery were considered. Variables of interest were manually extracted into a standardized electronic database. This study was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42022325068).
RESULTS
The initial search identified 518 articles. After the removal of the duplicate entries from the initial search, two authors independently reviewed the titles and abstracts of the remaining 453 articles. Finally, 78 articles were selected for full-text evaluation; 22 articles (a total of 7626 patients) were included in the analysis-one randomized controlled trial and 21 observational retrospective studies. The most common histology was squamous cell carcinoma in 60.9%, and the tumor size was <4 cm in 92.8% of patients. Peritoneal carcinomatosis pattern represented 22.2% of recurrences in the minimally invasive surgery approach versus 8.8% in open surgery, accounting for 15.5% of all recurrences. The meta-analysis of observational studies revealed a statistically significant higher risk of peritoneal carcinomatosis after minimally invasive surgery (OR 1.90, 95% CI 1.32 to 2.74, p<0.05).
CONCLUSION
Minimally invasive surgery is associated with a statistically significant higher risk of peritoneal carcinomatosis after radical hysterectomy for cervical cancer compared with open surgery.
Topics: Pregnancy; Female; Humans; Uterine Cervical Neoplasms; Retrospective Studies; Peritoneal Neoplasms; Hysterectomy; Carcinoma, Squamous Cell; Minimally Invasive Surgical Procedures; Recurrence; Neoplasm Staging; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 36351746
DOI: 10.1136/ijgc-2022-003937 -
Frontiers in Surgery 2021To provide updated evidence on comparative efficacy for clinical outcomes of radical trachelectomy and radical hysterectomy in patients with early-stage cervical...
To provide updated evidence on comparative efficacy for clinical outcomes of radical trachelectomy and radical hysterectomy in patients with early-stage cervical cancer. A systematic search was conducted in the PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and Google scholar databases. Studies were done in patients with early-stage cervical cancer that compared the outcomes between radical trachelectomy (RT) and hysterectomy (RH) were considered for inclusion in the review. The outcomes of interest were operative time, the volume of blood loss, need for blood transfusion, any complications, length of hospital stay, risk of recurrence, and survival. The strength of association was presented in the form of pooled relative risk (RR), hazards risk (HR), and weighted mean difference (WMD). Statistical analysis was done using STATA version 16.0. A total of 12 articles were included in the meta-analysis. The majority were retrospective cohort-based studies. Compared to RH, the operative time (in min) was comparatively higher in RT (WMD 23.43, 95% CI: 5.63, 41.24). Patients undergoing RT had blood loss (in ml) similar to those undergoing RT (WMD -81.34, 95% CI: -170.36, 7.68). There were no significant differences in the risk of intra-operative (RR 1.61, 95% CI: 0.49, 5.28) and post-operative complications (RR 1.13, 95% CI: 0.54, 2.40) between the two groups. Patients in the RT group had lesser duration of post-operative hospital stay (in days) (WMD -1.65, 95% CI: -3.22, -0.09). There was no statistically significant difference in the risk of recurrence (HR 1.21, 95% CI: 0.68, 2.18), 5-year overall survival (HR 1.00, 95% CI: 0.99, 1.02), and recurrence-free survival (HR 0.99, 95% CI: 0.96, 1.01) between the two groups. Among the patients with early-stage cervical cancer, RT is similar to RH in safety and clinical outcomes. Future studies with a randomized design and larger sample sizes are needed to further substantiate these findings.
PubMed: 34859038
DOI: 10.3389/fsurg.2021.735944