Nerve-Sparing Laparoscopic Radical Hysterectomy (nsLRH) without Adjuvant Therapy in FIGO Stage IB3 Cervical Cancer Patients: Surgical Technique and Survival Outcomes
Abstract
:Simple Summary
Abstract
1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Study Design and Population
2.2. Treatment and Follow-Up
2.3. The Surgical Technique
2.4. Endpoints of the Study
2.5. Statistical Analysis
3. Results
3.1. Patients’ General Features and Tumor Characteristics (Table 1)
All Patients (n = 74) | |
---|---|
Age, median (range) | 46 (20–77) |
Pre-menopausal status, n (%) | 35 (47.3%) |
Previous malignancies, n (%) | 0 |
BMI, median (range) | 29 (22–35) |
Histology, n (%) | |
Squamous | 50 (67.6) |
Adenocarcinoma | 24 (32.4) |
Grade, n (%) | |
G1 | 19 (25.7%) |
G2 | 29 (39.2%) |
G3 | 26 (35.1%) |
Presurgical FIGO Stage | |
IB3 | 74 (100%) |
3.2. Surgical Outcomes (Table 2)
Surgical Patients (n = 68) | |
---|---|
Conversion to laparotomy | - |
Operative time, median (range) | 236 (96–699) |
EBL, median (range) | 95 (15–300) |
Hospital days, median (range) | 3 (2–13) |
Tumor size (mm), median (range) | 58 (40–87) |
Parametrial length (mm), median (range) | |
Left | 48 (30–55) |
Right | 46 (34–61) |
Pelvic lymph nodes, mean (range) | |
Left | 15.8 (12–27) |
Right | 18.9 (13–37) |
Tumor-involved lymph nodes, n (%) | 7 (10.3%) |
TNM staging (FIGO stage) | |
pT1b3pN0cM0 (IB3) | 57 (83.8) |
pT2a2pN0cM0 (IIA2) | 1 (1.5%) |
pT2bpN0cM0 (IIB) | 3 (4.4%) |
pT1b3pN1cM0 (IIIC1) | 2 (2.9%) |
pT2a2pN1cM0 (IIIC1) | 4 (5.9%) |
pT2bpN1cM0 (IIIC1) | 1 (1.5%) |
3.3. Study Groups and Outcomes
3.4. Post-Operative Complications (Table 3)
All Patients (n = 68) | |
---|---|
Intra-operative complications, n (%) | - |
Post-operative complications, n (%) | 16 (23.5%) |
Grade I | 8 (11.7%) |
Urinary dysfunction | 6 |
Lymph cyst | 2 |
Grade II | 2 (2.9%) |
Urinary infection | 1 |
Lymphoedema | 1 |
Grade III | 6 (8.8%) |
Uretero-vaginal fistula | 4 |
Compartment syndrome | 1 |
Hematoma | 1 |
Grade IV | - |
4. Discussion
5. Conclusions
Supplementary Materials
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Bhatla, N.; Berek, J.S.; Cuello Fredes, M.; Denny, L.A.; Grenman, S.; Karunaratne, K.; Kehoe, S.T.; Konishi, I.; Olawaiye, A.B.; Prat, J.; et al. Revised FIGO staging for carcinoma of the cervix uteri. Int. J. Gynaecol. Obstet. Off. Organ Int. Fed. Gynaecol. Obstet. 2019, 145, 129–135. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Burke, T.W. Treatment Options in Stage IB Cervical Cancer: Radical Hysterectomy and Radiotherapy. Semin. Radiat. Oncol. 1994, 4, 34–40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Keys, H.M.; Bundy, B.N.; Stehman, F.B.; Muderspach, L.I.; Chafe, W.E.; Suggs, C.L.; Walker, J.L., III; Gersell, D. Cisplatin, radiation, and adjuvant hysterectomy compared with radiation and adjuvant hysterectomy for bulky stage IB cervical carcinoma. N. Engl. J. Med. 1999, 340, 1154–1161. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Peters, W.A., III; Liu, P.Y.; Barrett, R.J., II; Stock, R.J.; Monk, B.J.; Berek, J.S.; Souhami, L.; Grigsby, P.; Gordon, W., Jr.; Alberts, D.S. Concurrent chemotherapy and pelvic radiation therapy compared with pelvic radiation therapy alone as adjuvant therapy after radical surgery in high-risk early-stage cancer of the cervix. J. Clin. Oncol. Off. J. Am. Soc. Clin. Oncol. 2000, 18, 1606–1613. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Rose, P.G.; Bundy, B.N.; Watkins, E.B.; Thigpen, J.T.; Deppe, G.; Maiman, M.A.; Clarke-Pearson, D.L.; Insalaco, S. Concurrent cisplatin-based radiotherapy and chemotherapy for locally advanced cervical cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 1999, 340, 1144–1153. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Stehman, F.B.; Ali, S.; Keys, H.M.; Muderspach, L.I.; Chafe, W.E.; Gallup, D.G.; Walker, J.L.; Gersell, D. Radiation therapy with or without weekly cisplatin for bulky stage 1B cervical carcinoma: Follow-up of a Gynecologic Oncology Group trial. Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol. 2007, 197, 503.e1–503.e6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Abu-Rustum, N.R.; Yashar, C.M.; Arend, R.; Barber, E.; Bradley, K.; Brooks, R.; Campos, S.M.; Chino, J.; Chon, H.S.; Crispens, M.A.; et al. NCCN Guidelines® Insights: Cervical Cancer, Version 1.2024. J. Natl. Compr. Cancer Netw. JNCCN 2023, 21, 1224–1233. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Pötter, R.; Georg, P.; Dimopoulos, J.C.; Grimm, M.; Berger, D.; Nesvacil, N.; Georg, D.; Schmid, M.P.; Reinthaller, A.; Sturdza, A.; et al. Clinical outcome of protocol based image (MRI) guided adaptive brachytherapy combined with 3D conformal radiotherapy with or without chemotherapy in patients with locally advanced cervical cancer. Radiother. Oncol. J. Eur. Soc. Ther. Radiol. Oncol. 2011, 100, 116–123. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sturdza, A.; Pötter, R.; Fokdal, L.U.; Haie-Meder, C.; Tan, L.T.; Mazeron, R.; Petric, P.; Šegedin, B.; Jurgenliemk-Schulz, I.M.; Nomden, C.; et al. Image guided brachytherapy in locally advanced cervical cancer: Improved pelvic control and survival in RetroEMBRACE, a multicenter cohort study. Radiother. Oncol. J. Eur. Soc. Ther. Radiol. Oncol. 2016, 120, 428–433. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Cibula, D.; Pötter, R.; Planchamp, F.; Avall-Lundqvist, E.; Fischerova, D.; Haie Meder, C.; Köhler, C.; Landoni, F.; Lax, S.; Lindegaard, J.C.; et al. The European Society of Gynaecological Oncology/European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology/European Society of Pathology Guidelines for the Management of Patients with Cervical Cancer. Int. J. Gynecol. Cancer Off. J. Int. Gynecol. Cancer Soc. 2018, 28, 641–655. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Delgado, G.; Bundy, B.; Zaino, R.; Sevin, B.U.; Creasman, W.T.; Major, F. Prospective surgical-pathological study of disease-free interval in patients with stage IB squamous cell carcinoma of the cervix: A Gynecologic Oncology Group study. Gynecol. Oncol. 1990, 38, 352–357. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pujade-Lauraine, E.; Tan, D.S.P.; Leary, A.; Mirza, M.R.; Enomoto, T.; Takyar, J.; Nunes, A.T.; Chagüi, J.D.H.; Paskow, M.J.; Monk, B.J. Comparison of global treatment guidelines for locally advanced cervical cancer to optimize best care practices: A systematic and scoping review. Gynecol. Oncol. 2022, 167, 360–372. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Sedlis, A.; Bundy, B.N.; Rotman, M.Z.; Lentz, S.S.; Muderspach, L.I.; Zaino, R.J. A randomized trial of pelvic radiation therapy versus no further therapy in selected patients with stage IB carcinoma of the cervix after radical hysterectomy and pelvic lymphadenectomy: A Gynecologic Oncology Group Study. Gynecol. Oncol. 1999, 73, 177–183. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Rotman, M.; Sedlis, A.; Piedmonte, M.R.; Bundy, B.; Lentz, S.S.; Muderspach, L.I.; Zaino, R.J. A phase III randomized trial of postoperative pelvic irradiation in Stage IB cervical carcinoma with poor prognostic features: Follow-up of a gynecologic oncology group study. Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys. 2006, 65, 169–176. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Inoue, T.; Okumura, M. Prognostic significance of parametrial extension in patients with cervical carcinoma Stages IB, IIA, and IIB. A study of 628 cases treated by radical hysterectomy and lymphadenectomy with or without postoperative irradiation. Cancer 1984, 54, 1714–1719. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lin, H.H.; Cheng, W.F.; Chan, K.W.; Chang, D.Y.; Chen, C.K.; Huang, S.C. Risk factors for recurrence in patients with stage IB, IIA, and IIB cervical carcinoma after radical hysterectomy and postoperative pelvic irradiation. Obstet. Gynecol. 1996, 88, 274–279. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Martin, A.L.; Sinha, S.; Peres, L.C.; Hakam, A.; Chon, H.S.; Hoffman, M.S.; Shahzad, M.M.; Wenham, R.M.; Chern, J.Y. The impact of distance to closest negative margin on survival after pelvic exenteration. Gynecol. Oncol. 2022, 165, 514–521. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rodriguez, J.; Viveros-Carreño, D.; Pareja, R. Adjuvant treatment after radical surgery for cervical cancer with intermediate risk factors: Is it time for an update? Int. J. Gynecol. Cancer Off. J. Int. Gynecol. Cancer Soc. 2022, 32, 1219–1226. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cibula, D.; Raspollini, M.R.; Planchamp, F.; Centeno, C.; Chargari, C.; Felix, A.; Fischerová, D.; Jahnn-Kuch, D.; Joly, F.; Kohler, C.; et al. ESGO/ESTRO/ESP Guidelines for the management of patients with cervical cancer-Update 2023. Int. J. Gynecol. Cancer Off. J. Int. Gynecol. Cancer Soc. 2023, 33, 649–666. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Querleu, D.; Morrow, C.P. Classification of radical hysterectomy. Lancet Oncol. 2008, 9, 297–303. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Pecorelli, S. Revised FIGO staging for carcinoma of the vulva, cervix, and endometrium. Int. J. Gynaecol. Obstet. Off. Organ Int. Fed. Gynaecol. Obstet. 2009, 105, 103–104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Hertel, H.; Köhler, C.; Michels, W.; Possover, M.; Tozzi, R.; Schneider, A. Laparoscopic-assisted radical vaginal hysterectomy (LARVH): Prospective evaluation of 200 patients with cervical cancer. Gynecol. Oncol. 2003, 90, 505–511. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Höckel, M.; Hentschel, B.; Horn, L.C. Association between developmental steps in the organogenesis of the uterine cervix and locoregional progression of cervical cancer: A prospective clinicopathological analysis. Lancet Oncol. 2014, 15, 445–456. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Dindo, D.; Demartines, N.; Clavien, P.A. Classification of surgical complications: A new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey. Ann. Surg. 2004, 240, 205–213. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Simon, R. Optimal two-stage designs for phase II clinical trials. Control. Clin. Trials 1989, 10, 1–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, Z.; Yang, Q.; Guo, J.; Liang, G.; Duan, H.; Wang, S.; Hao, M.; Liang, W.; Li, D.; Zhan, X.; et al. Survival Outcomes of Patients with Stage IB3 Cervical Cancer Who Undergo Abdominal Radical Hysterectomy Versus Radiochemotherapy. Front. Oncol. 2022, 12, 933755. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Chen, C.S.; Huang, E.Y. Comparison of Oncologic Outcomes between Radical Hysterectomy and Primary Concurrent Chemoradiotherapy in Women with Bulky IB and IIA Cervical Cancer under Risk Stratification. Cancers 2023, 15, 3034. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Liu, P.; Lin, L.; Kong, Y.; Huo, Z.; Zhu, L.; Bin, X.; Lang, J.; Chen, C. Comparison of survival outcomes between radio-chemotherapy and radical hysterectomy with postoperative standard therapy in patients with stage IB1 to IIA2 cervical cancer: Long-term oncological outcome analysis in 37 Chinese hospitals. BMC Cancer 2020, 20, 189. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Chakrabarti, M.; Nordin, A.; Khodabocus, J. Debulking hysterectomy followed by chemoradiotherapy versus chemoradiotherapy for FIGO stage (2019) IB3/II cervical cancer. Cochrane Database Syst. Rev. 2022, 9, CD012246. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Rose, P.G. Chemoradiotherapy for cervical cancer. Eur. J. Cancer 2002, 38, 270–278. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Keys, H.M.; Bundy, B.N.; Stehman, F.B.; Okagaki, T.; Gallup, D.G.; Burnett, A.F.; Rotman, M.Z.; Fowler, W.C., Jr.; Gynecologic Oncology Group. Radiation therapy with and without extrafascial hysterectomy for bulky stage IB cervical carcinoma: A randomized trial of the Gynecologic Oncology Group. Gynecol. Oncol. 2003, 89, 343–353. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Schmid, M.P.; Lindegaard, J.C.; Mahantshetty, U.; Tanderup, K.; Jürgenliemk-Schulz, I.; Haie-Meder, C.; Fokdal, L.U.; Sturdza, A.; Hoskin, P.; Segedin, B.; et al. Risk Factors for Local Failure Following Chemoradiation and Magnetic Resonance Image-Guided Brachytherapy in Locally Advanced Cervical Cancer: Results From the EMBRACE-I Study. J. Clin. Oncol. Off. J. Am. Soc. Clin. Oncol. 2023, 41, 1933–1942. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Vittrup, A.S.; Kirchheiner, K.; Pötter, R.; Fokdal, L.U.; Jensen, N.B.K.; Spampinato, S.; Haie-Meder, C.; Schmid, M.P.; Sturdza, A.; Mahantshetty, U.; et al. Overall Severe Morbidity After Chemo-Radiation Therapy and Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Guided Adaptive Brachytherapy in Locally Advanced Cervical Cancer: Results From the EMBRACE-I Study. Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys. 2023, 116, 807–824. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Lindegaard, J.C.; Petric, P.; Schmid, M.P.; Nesvacil, N.; Haie-Meder, C.; Fokdal, L.U.; Sturdza, A.E.; Hoskin, P.; Mahantshetty, U.; Segedin, B.; et al. Prognostic Implications of Uterine Cervical Cancer Regression During Chemoradiation Evaluated by the T-Score in the Multicenter EMBRACE I Study. Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys. 2022, 113, 379–389. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Pötter, R.; Tanderup, K.; Kirisits, C.; de Leeuw, A.; Kirchheiner, K.; Nout, R.; Tan, L.T.; Haie-Meder, C.; Mahantshetty, U.; Segedin, B.; et al. The EMBRACE II study: The outcome and prospect of two decades of evolution within the GEC-ESTRO GYN working group and the EMBRACE studies. Clin. Transl. Radiat. Oncol. 2018, 9, 48–60. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Jones, B. Toxicity after cervical cancer treatment using radiotherapy and chemotherapy. Clin. Oncol. 2009, 21, 56–63. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Spampinato, S.; Jensen, N.B.K.; Pötter, R.; Fokdal, L.U.; Chargari, C.; Lindegaard, J.C.; Schmid, M.P.; Sturdza, A.; Jürgenliemk-Schulz, I.M.; Mahantshetty, U.; et al. Severity and Persistency of Late Gastrointestinal Morbidity in Locally Advanced Cervical Cancer: Lessons Learned From EMBRACE-I and Implications for the Future. Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys. 2022, 112, 681–693. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Westerveld, H.; Kirchheiner, K.; Nout, R.A.; Tanderup, K.; Lindegaard, J.C.; Spampinato, S.; Sturdza, A.; Nesvacil, N.; Bruheim, K.; Hellebust, T.P.; et al. Dose-effect relationship between vaginal dose points and vaginal stenosis in cervical cancer: An EMBRACE-I sub-study. Radiother. Oncol. J. Eur. Soc. Ther. Radiol. Oncol. 2022, 168, 8–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chemoradiotherapy for Cervical Cancer Meta-Analysis Collaboration. Reducing uncertainties about the effects of chemoradiotherapy for cervical cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis of individual patient data from 18 randomized trials. J. Clin. Oncol. Off. J. Am. Soc. Clin. Oncol. 2008, 26, 5802–5812. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pfaendler, K.S.; Wenzel, L.; Mechanic, M.B.; Penner, K.R. Cervical cancer survivorship: Long-term quality of life and social support. Clin. Ther. 2015, 37, 39–48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gondi, V.; Bentzen, S.M.; Sklenar, K.L.; Dunn, E.F.; Petereit, D.G.; Tannehill, S.P.; Straub, M.; Bradley, K.A. Severe late toxicities following concomitant chemoradiotherapy compared to radiotherapy alone in cervical cancer: An inter-era analysis. Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys. 2012, 84, 973–982. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Boice, J.D., Jr.; Day, N.E.; Andersen, A.; Brinton, L.A.; Brown, R.; Choi, N.W.; Clarke, E.A.; Coleman, M.P.; Curtis, R.E.; Flannery, J.T.; et al. Second cancers following radiation treatment for cervical cancer. An international collaboration among cancer registries. J. Natl. Cancer Inst. 1985, 74, 955–975. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Rocconi, R.P.; Estes, J.M.; Leath, C.A., III; Kilgore, L.C.; Huh, W.K.; Straughn, J.M., Jr. Management strategies for stage IB2 cervical cancer: A cost-effectiveness analysis. Gynecol. Oncol. 2005, 97, 387–394. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Jewell, E.L.; Kulasingam, S.; Myers, E.R.; Alvarez Secord, A.; Havrilesky, L.J. Primary surgery versus chemoradiation in the treatment of IB2 cervical carcinoma: A cost effectiveness analysis. Gynecol. Oncol. 2007, 107, 532–540. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sakamoto, S.; Takizawa, K. An improved radical hysterectomy with fewer urological complications and with no loss of therapeutic results for invasive cervical cancer. Baillieres Clin. Obstet. Gynaecol. 1988, 2, 953–962. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Sakuragi, N.; Murakami, G.; Konno, Y.; Kaneuchi, M.; Watari, H. Nerve-sparing radical hysterectomy in the precision surgery for cervical cancer. J. Gynecol. Oncol. 2020, 31, e49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Kostov, S.; Kornovski, Y.; Watrowski, R.; Yordanov, A.; Slavchev, S.; Ivanova, Y.; Yalcin, H.; Ivanov, I.; Selcuk, I. Revisiting Querleu–Morrow Radical Hysterectomy: How to Apply the Anatomy of Parametrium and Pelvic Autonomic Nerves to Cervical Cancer Surgery? Cancers 2024, 16, 2729. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ramirez, P.T.; Frumovitz, M.; Pareja, R.; Lopez, A.; Vieira, M.; Ribeiro, R.; Buda, A.; Yan, X.; Shuzhong, Y.; Chetty, N.; et al. Minimally Invasive versus Abdominal Radical Hysterectomy for Cervical Cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 2018, 379, 1895–1904. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Kohler, C.; Hertel, H.; Herrmann, J.; Marnitz, S.; Mallmann, P.; Favero, G.; Plaikner, A.; Martus, P.; Gajda, M.; Schneider, A. Laparoscopic radical hysterectomy with transvaginal closure of vaginal cuff—A multicenter analysis. Int. J. Gynecol. Cancer 2019, 29, 845–850. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ramirez, P.T.; Obermair, A. Minimally Invasive or Abdominal Radical Hysterectomy for Cervical Cancer. Reply. N. Engl. J. Med. 2019, 380, 794–795. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Chen, C.; Guo, J.; Liu, P.; Li, Z.; Jiang, H.; Zhu, Q.; Bin, X.; Lang, J. Comparison of survival outcomes between laparoscopic surgery and abdominal surgery for radical hysterectomy as primary treatment in patients with stage IB2/IIA2 cervical cancer. J. Obstet. Gynaecol. Res. 2021, 47, 1516–1526. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Chiva, L.; Zanagnolo, V.; Querleu, D.; Martin-Calvo, N.; Arévalo-Serrano, J.; Căpîlna, M.E.; Fagotti, A.; Kucukmetin, A.; Mom, C.; Chakalova, G.; et al. SUCCOR study: An international European cohort observational study comparing minimally invasive surgery versus open abdominal radical hysterectomy in patients with stage IB1 cervical cancer. Int. J. Gynecol. Cancer Off. J. Int. Gynecol. Cancer Soc. 2020, 30, 1269–1277. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Leitao, M.M., Jr.; Zhou, Q.C.; Brandt, B.; Iasonos, A.; Sioulas, V.; Lavigne Mager, K.; Shahin, M.; Bruce, S.; Black, D.R.; Kay, C.G.; et al. The MEMORY Study: MulticentEr study of Minimally invasive surgery versus Open Radical hysterectomy in the management of early-stage cervical cancer: Survival outcomes. Gynecol. Oncol. 2022, 166, 417–424. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Falconer, H.; Palsdottir, K.; Stalberg, K.; Dahm-Kähler, P.; Ottander, U.; Lundin, E.S.; Wijk, L.; Kimmig, R.; Jensen, P.T.; Zahl Eriksson, A.G.; et al. Robot-assisted approach to cervical cancer (RACC): An international multi-center, open-label randomized controlled trial. Int. J. Gynecol. Cancer Off. J. Int. Gynecol. Cancer Soc. 2019, 29, 1072–1076. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bixel, K.L.; Leitao, M.M.; Chase, D.M.; Quick, A.; Lim, P.C.; Eskander, R.N.; Gotlieb, W.H.; LoCoco, S.; Martino, M.A.; McCormick, C.; et al. ROCC/GOG-3043: A randomized non-inferiority trial of robotic versus open radical hysterectomy for early-stage cervical cancer. J. Clin. Oncol. 2022, 40, TPS5605. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wu, X.; Yu, H.; Bai, Y.; Hou, Y.; Lou, W.; Wang, X.; Zhu, T.; Zhang, Y.; Hu, W.; Xue, X.; et al. A multicenter noninferior randomized controlled study comparing the efficacy of laparoscopic versus abdominal radical hysterectomy for cervical cancer (stage IB3 and IIA2): Study protocol of the LAUNCH 3 trial. Trials 2023, 24, 542. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Ding, M. Clinical Trial of Minimally Invasive Surgery Versus Abdominal Surgery in Patients with Early Stage Cervical Cancer (RWS-01). ClinicalTrials.gov NCT NCT03955185, Registrated on 1 May 2019. Available online: https://classic.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03955185 (accessed on 24 September 2024).
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2024 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Tozzi, R.; Bigardi, S.; Spagnol, G.; Ferrari, F.; Saccardi, C.; Noventa, M.; Marchetti, M. Nerve-Sparing Laparoscopic Radical Hysterectomy (nsLRH) without Adjuvant Therapy in FIGO Stage IB3 Cervical Cancer Patients: Surgical Technique and Survival Outcomes. Cancers 2024, 16, 3355. https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers16193355
Tozzi R, Bigardi S, Spagnol G, Ferrari F, Saccardi C, Noventa M, Marchetti M. Nerve-Sparing Laparoscopic Radical Hysterectomy (nsLRH) without Adjuvant Therapy in FIGO Stage IB3 Cervical Cancer Patients: Surgical Technique and Survival Outcomes. Cancers. 2024; 16(19):3355. https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers16193355
Chicago/Turabian StyleTozzi, Roberto, Sofia Bigardi, Giulia Spagnol, Federico Ferrari, Carlo Saccardi, Marco Noventa, and Matteo Marchetti. 2024. "Nerve-Sparing Laparoscopic Radical Hysterectomy (nsLRH) without Adjuvant Therapy in FIGO Stage IB3 Cervical Cancer Patients: Surgical Technique and Survival Outcomes" Cancers 16, no. 19: 3355. https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers16193355