• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

腹腔镜与传统手术治疗早期宫颈癌的效果比较。

Early cervical cancer managed by laparoscopy and conventional surgery: comparison of treatment results.

机构信息

Gynecologic Oncology Department, Maria Sklodowska-Curie Memorial Cancer Center, Warsaw, Poland.

出版信息

Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2009 Nov;19(8):1390-5. doi: 10.1111/IGC.0b013e3181ba5e88.

DOI:10.1111/IGC.0b013e3181ba5e88
PMID:20009895
Abstract

INTRODUCTION

The goal of this retrospective analysis was to compare the results of treatment in patients with early cervical cancer managed by laparoscopy with those for patients observed after laparotomy.

METHODS

The retrospective analysis was carried out with 22 patients operated on with total laparoscopic hysterectomy and 58 patients treated by abdominal hysterectomy. Patients with clinical tumor stage IA, IB1, or IIA were eligible for surgery. The main efficacy end point was disease-free survival evaluated by the Kaplan-Meier method. The survival curves were compared using log-rank tests. In addition, length of hospitalization, duration of surgery, and complication rate were compared. P < 0.05 was set as statistically significant.

RESULTS

Predicted 3-year disease-free survival rates in the "open surgery" and "laparoscopy" groups were 0.86 (standard deviation [SD], 0.049) and 0.82 (SD, 0.098), respectively (P = 0.53). Recurrence rate was 13.6% after laparoscopy and 12% in open surgery. In 2 patients, intraperitoneal spread occurred after laparoscopy. The operation time was longer and hospitalization shorter after laparoscopy.

CONCLUSIONS

The 3-year disease-free survival was similar in both groups. Total laparoscopic radical hysterectomy may be an option in early cervical cancer; however, the intraperitoneal spread in 2 patients compels a search for possible risk factors in patients managed by laparoscopy.

摘要

简介

本回顾性分析旨在比较腹腔镜治疗早期宫颈癌患者与开腹手术治疗患者的结果。

方法

本回顾性分析纳入了 22 例行全腹腔镜子宫切除术的患者和 58 例行腹式子宫切除术的患者。临床肿瘤分期为 IA、IB1 或 IIA 的患者有手术适应证。主要疗效终点是通过 Kaplan-Meier 法评估无病生存率。使用对数秩检验比较生存曲线。此外,还比较了住院时间、手术时间和并发症发生率。P<0.05 为统计学显著。

结果

“开腹手术”和“腹腔镜”组的 3 年无病生存率预测值分别为 0.86(标准差[SD],0.049)和 0.82(SD,0.098)(P=0.53)。腹腔镜组的复发率为 13.6%,开腹组为 12%。腹腔镜组有 2 例发生腹腔内播散。腹腔镜组的手术时间较长,住院时间较短。

结论

两组的 3 年无病生存率相似。全腹腔镜根治性子宫切除术可能是早期宫颈癌的一种选择;然而,腹腔镜组的 2 例患者发生腹腔内播散,需要寻找可能的腹腔镜治疗患者的危险因素。

相似文献

1
Early cervical cancer managed by laparoscopy and conventional surgery: comparison of treatment results.腹腔镜与传统手术治疗早期宫颈癌的效果比较。
Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2009 Nov;19(8):1390-5. doi: 10.1111/IGC.0b013e3181ba5e88.
2
Learning curve of laparoscopic radical hysterectomy with pelvic and/or para-aortic lymphadenectomy in the early and locally advanced cervical cancer: comparison of the first 50 and second 50 cases.早期和局部晚期宫颈癌腹腔镜根治性子宫切除术伴盆腔和/或腹主动脉旁淋巴结切除术的学习曲线:前 50 例和后 50 例的比较。
Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2009 Nov;19(8):1459-64. doi: 10.1111/IGC.0b013e3181b76640.
3
Minimally invasive surgical management of early-stage cervical cancer: an analysis of the risk factors of surgical complications and of oncologic outcomes.早期宫颈癌的微创外科治疗:手术并发症风险因素及肿瘤学结局分析
Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2015 May;25(4):714-21. doi: 10.1097/IGC.0000000000000390.
4
Open versus laparoscopic pelvic lymph node dissection in early stage cervical cancer: no difference in surgical or disease outcome.早期宫颈癌经腹与腹腔镜盆腔淋巴结清扫术的比较:手术和疾病结局无差异。
Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2012 Jan;22(1):107-14. doi: 10.1097/IGC.0b013e31822c273d.
5
Clinical and Oncologic Outcomes of Robotic Versus Abdominal Radical Hysterectomy for Women With Cervical Cancer: Experience at a Referral Cancer Center.机器人辅助与腹式根治性子宫切除术治疗宫颈癌女性的临床及肿瘤学结局:在一家癌症转诊中心的经验
Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2016 Mar;26(3):568-74. doi: 10.1097/IGC.0000000000000645.
6
Robot versus laparoscopic nerve-sparing radical hysterectomy for cervical cancer: a comparison of the intraoperative and perioperative results of a single surgeon's initial experience.机器人与腹腔镜下保留神经的根治性子宫切除术治疗宫颈癌:单中心经验初步比较术中及围手术期结果。
Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2013 Jul;23(6):1145-9. doi: 10.1097/IGC.0b013e31829a5db0.
7
Radical surgery with individualized postoperative radiation for stage IB cervical cancer: oncologic outcomes and severe complications.个体化术后放疗治疗 IB 期宫颈癌根治术:肿瘤学结果和严重并发症。
Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2013 Mar;23(3):553-8. doi: 10.1097/IGC.0b013e3182849d53.
8
Nerve-sparing versus conventional laparoscopic radical hysterectomy: a minimum 12 months' follow-up study.保留神经的与传统腹腔镜根治性子宫切除术比较:至少 12 个月的随访研究。
Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2014 May;24(4):787-93. doi: 10.1097/IGC.0000000000000110.
9
Robotic versus laparoscopic radical hysterectomy in cervical cancer patients: a matched-case comparative study.宫颈癌患者机器人辅助与腹腔镜根治性子宫切除术:一项配对病例对照研究。
Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2014 Oct;24(8):1466-73. doi: 10.1097/IGC.0000000000000232.
10
Outcomes of Laparoscopic Radical Hysterectomy in Ia1-Ib1 Cervical Cancer Patients: A Multi-Center Study with 10 Years' Experiences in the Real World.Ia1-Ib1期宫颈癌患者腹腔镜根治性子宫切除术的结局:一项具有10年真实世界经验的多中心研究
Ann Surg Oncol. 2025 Mar;32(3):2213-2222. doi: 10.1245/s10434-024-16637-3. Epub 2024 Dec 29.

引用本文的文献

1
A Minimally Invasive Treatment Approach for Early-Stage Uterine Cervical Cancer: The Impact of the LACC Trial and a Literature Review.早期子宫颈癌的微创治疗方法:LACC试验的影响及文献综述
Medicina (Kaunas). 2025 Mar 28;61(4):620. doi: 10.3390/medicina61040620.
2
A meta-analysis comparing open and minimally invasive cervical tumor surgery wound infection and postoperative complications.一项比较开放性与微创性宫颈肿瘤手术伤口感染及术后并发症的荟萃分析。
BMC Surg. 2024 Dec 23;24(1):413. doi: 10.1186/s12893-024-02713-8.
3
A meta-analysis examining the impact of open surgical therapy versus minimally invasive surgery on wound infection in females with cervical cancer.
一项荟萃分析研究了开放式手术治疗与微创手术治疗对女性宫颈癌患者伤口感染的影响。
Int Wound J. 2024 Apr;21(4):e14535. doi: 10.1111/iwj.14535. Epub 2024 Jan 2.
4
Cost-Utility Analysis of Open Radical Hysterectomy Compared to Minimally Invasive Radical Hysterectomy for Early-Stage Cervical Cancer.早期宫颈癌开放根治性子宫切除术与微创根治性子宫切除术的成本效用分析
Cancers (Basel). 2023 Aug 29;15(17):4325. doi: 10.3390/cancers15174325.
5
Association of red cell distribution width/albumin ratio with intraoperative blood transfusion in cervical cancer patients.红细胞分布宽度/白蛋白比值与宫颈癌患者术中输血的关系。
PLoS One. 2022 Nov 18;17(11):e0277481. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0277481. eCollection 2022.
6
Effect of minimally invasive surgery and laparotomy on wound infection and postoperative and intraoperative complications in the management of cervical cancer: A meta-analysis.微创外科与剖腹手术治疗宫颈癌的术中及术后并发症和伤口感染的效果:一项荟萃分析。
Int Wound J. 2023 Apr;20(4):1061-1071. doi: 10.1111/iwj.13962. Epub 2022 Sep 16.
7
Minimally Invasive Surgery for Cervical Cancer in Light of the LACC Trial: What Have We Learned?基于 LACC 试验对宫颈癌的微创外科治疗:我们学到了什么?
Curr Oncol. 2022 Feb 14;29(2):1093-1106. doi: 10.3390/curroncol29020093.
8
Comparison of Minimally Invasive Versus Abdominal Radical Hysterectomy for Early-Stage Cervical Cancer: An Updated Meta-Analysis.早期宫颈癌微创与腹式根治性子宫切除术的比较:一项更新的荟萃分析
Front Oncol. 2022 Jan 24;11:762921. doi: 10.3389/fonc.2021.762921. eCollection 2021.
9
A meta-analysis of survival after minimally invasive radical hysterectomy versus abdominal radical hysterectomy in cervical cancer: center-associated factors matter.对宫颈癌行微创根治性子宫切除术与开腹根治性子宫切除术的生存情况的荟萃分析:中心相关因素很重要。
Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2022 Sep;306(3):623-637. doi: 10.1007/s00404-021-06348-5. Epub 2022 Jan 21.
10
Effects of Perioperative Inflammatory Response in Cervical Cancer: Laparoscopic versus Open Surgery.宫颈癌围手术期炎症反应的影响:腹腔镜手术与开放手术对比
J Clin Med. 2021 Sep 16;10(18):4198. doi: 10.3390/jcm10184198.