Frumovitz Michael, dos Reis Ricardo, Sun Charlotte C, Milam Michael R, Bevers Michael W, Brown Jubilee, Slomovitz Brian M, Ramirez Pedro T
Department of Gynecologic Oncology, the University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas 77030, USA.
Obstet Gynecol. 2007 Jul;110(1):96-102. doi: 10.1097/01.AOG.0000268798.75353.04.
To compare intraoperative, pathologic, and postoperative outcomes of total laparoscopic radical hysterectomy with abdominal radical hysterectomy and pelvic lymphadenectomy for women with early-stage cervical cancer.
We reviewed all patients who underwent total laparoscopic radical hysterectomy or abdominal radical hysterectomy and pelvic lymphadenectomy between 2004 and 2006.
Fifty-four patients underwent abdominal radical hysterectomy, and 35 underwent total laparoscopic radical hysterectomy. Mean age was 41.8 years, and mean body mass index 28.1. There was no difference in demographic or tumor factors between the two groups. Mean estimated blood loss was 548 mL with abdominal radical hysterectomy compared with 319 mL with total laparoscopic radical hysterectomy (P=.009), and 15% of patients who underwent abdominal radical hysterectomy required a blood transfusion compared with 11% who underwent total laparoscopic radical hysterectomy (P=.62). Mean operative time was 307 minutes for abdominal radical hysterectomy compared with 344 minutes for total laparoscopic radical hysterectomy (P=.03). On pathologic examination, there was no significant difference in the amount of parametrial tissue, vaginal cuff, or negative margins obtained. A mean 19 pelvic nodes were obtained during abdominal radical hysterectomy compared with 14 during total laparoscopic radical hysterectomy (P=.001). The median duration of hospital stay was significantly shorter for total laparoscopic radical hysterectomy (2.0 compared with 5.0 days, P<.001). For abdominal radical hysterectomy, 53% of patients experienced postoperative infectious morbidity compared with 18% for total laparoscopic radical hysterectomy (P=.001). There was no difference in postoperative noninfectious morbidity. There was no difference in return of urinary function.
Total laparoscopic radical hysterectomy reduces operative blood loss, postoperative infectious morbidity, and postoperative length of stay without sacrificing the size of radical hysterectomy specimen margins; however, total laparoscopic radical hysterectomy is associated with increased operative time.
比较早期宫颈癌患者行全腹腔镜根治性子宫切除术与腹式根治性子宫切除术及盆腔淋巴结清扫术的术中、病理及术后结果。
我们回顾了2004年至2006年间接受全腹腔镜根治性子宫切除术或腹式根治性子宫切除术及盆腔淋巴结清扫术的所有患者。
54例患者接受了腹式根治性子宫切除术,35例接受了全腹腔镜根治性子宫切除术。平均年龄为41.8岁,平均体重指数为28.1。两组在人口统计学或肿瘤因素方面无差异。腹式根治性子宫切除术的平均估计失血量为548毫升,而全腹腔镜根治性子宫切除术为319毫升(P = 0.009),接受腹式根治性子宫切除术的患者中有15%需要输血,而接受全腹腔镜根治性子宫切除术的患者中这一比例为11%(P = 0.62)。腹式根治性子宫切除术的平均手术时间为307分钟,全腹腔镜根治性子宫切除术为344分钟(P = 0.03)。病理检查显示,所获得的宫旁组织量、阴道切缘或阴性切缘无显著差异。腹式根治性子宫切除术平均获得19个盆腔淋巴结,全腹腔镜根治性子宫切除术为14个(P = 0.001)。全腹腔镜根治性子宫切除术的中位住院时间明显更短(2.0天对比5.0天,P < 0.001)。对于腹式根治性子宫切除术,53%的患者出现术后感染性并发症,而全腹腔镜根治性子宫切除术为18%(P = 0.001)。术后非感染性并发症无差异。排尿功能恢复情况无差异。
全腹腔镜根治性子宫切除术可减少术中失血量、术后感染性并发症及术后住院时间,且不影响根治性子宫切除标本切缘大小;然而,全腹腔镜根治性子宫切除术与手术时间延长有关。