• 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

经阴道子宫切除术时使用宫内操作器与子宫内膜癌淋巴管血管间隙浸润风险。

Intrauterine Manipulator Use During Minimally Invasive Hysterectomy and Risk of Lymphovascular Space Invasion in Endometrial Cancer.

出版信息

Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2018 Feb;28(2):208-219. doi: 10.1097/IGC.0000000000001181.

DOI:10.1097/IGC.0000000000001181
PMID:29324541
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7526862/
Abstract

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to examine an association between intrauterine manipulator (IUM) use and frequency of lymphovascular space invasion (LVSI) in women with endometrial cancer undergoing minimally invasive hysterectomy.

METHODS

A retrospective case-control study was conducted among stage I-IV endometrial cancer patients who underwent hysterectomy between 2008 and 2015. Medical records were reviewed for patient demographics, surgical details, and tumor characteristics. Women who underwent total laparoscopic hysterectomy (TLH) with IUM use were compared with women who underwent total abdominal hysterectomy (TAH). Review of archived medical record for data collection and propensity score matching were performed to adjust for background differences between TLH-IUM and TAH groups. A systematic literature review with pooled analysis was performed to examine frequency of LVSI.

RESULTS

There were 687 women who underwent hysterectomy for endometrial cancer. Of those, 419 women underwent TLH with IUM use and 194 women underwent TAH. The most common type of IUM was VCare (89.5%). There was no statistically significant difference in the frequency of LVSI between the 2 groups: 15.1% for TLH-IUM vs 19.9% for TAH (P = 0.14). After propensity score matching, frequencies of LVSI were similar between the 2 groups: 21.2% for TLH-IUM vs 19.6% for TAH (P = 0.78). Systematic literature review identified 1371 cases of TLH-IUM and 1246 cases of TAH performed for endometrial cancer, and frequencies of LVSI were similar between the 2 groups (15.0% vs 13.6%, P = 0.31).

CONCLUSION

Our study suggests that IUM use during TLH for endometrial cancer is not associated with increased frequency of LVSI.

摘要

目的

本研究旨在探讨在接受微创子宫切除术的子宫内膜癌患者中,宫内操作器(IUM)的使用与淋巴管血管间隙浸润(LVSI)的频率之间是否存在关联。

方法

对 2008 年至 2015 年间接受子宫切除术的 I 期-IV 期子宫内膜癌患者进行了回顾性病例对照研究。对患者的人口统计学、手术细节和肿瘤特征进行了病历回顾。比较了接受腹腔镜全子宫切除术(TLH)加 IUM 使用的女性和接受全腹部子宫切除术(TAH)的女性。为了调整 TLH-IUM 和 TAH 组之间的背景差异,对存档病历进行了数据收集和倾向评分匹配的回顾。进行了系统的文献综述和荟萃分析,以检查 LVSI 的频率。

结果

共有 687 名女性因子宫内膜癌接受了子宫切除术。其中,419 名女性接受了 TLH 加 IUM 使用,194 名女性接受了 TAH。最常见的 IUM 类型是 VCare(89.5%)。两组之间 LVSI 的频率无统计学差异:TLH-IUM 为 15.1%,TAH 为 19.9%(P=0.14)。在进行倾向评分匹配后,两组之间 LVSI 的频率相似:TLH-IUM 为 21.2%,TAH 为 19.6%(P=0.78)。系统的文献综述确定了 1371 例 TLH-IUM 和 1246 例 TAH 用于子宫内膜癌,两组之间 LVSI 的频率相似(15.0% vs 13.6%,P=0.31)。

结论

我们的研究表明,在接受微创子宫切除术治疗子宫内膜癌期间使用 IUM 不会增加 LVSI 的频率。

相似文献

1
Intrauterine Manipulator Use During Minimally Invasive Hysterectomy and Risk of Lymphovascular Space Invasion in Endometrial Cancer.经阴道子宫切除术时使用宫内操作器与子宫内膜癌淋巴管血管间隙浸润风险。
Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2018 Feb;28(2):208-219. doi: 10.1097/IGC.0000000000001181.
2
Does the type of surgery for early-stage endometrial cancer affect the rate of reported lymphovascular space invasion in final pathology specimens?早期子宫内膜癌的手术类型是否会影响最终病理标本中报告的淋巴管血管侵犯率?
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2013 Jan;208(1):71.e1-6. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2012.10.009. Epub 2012 Oct 16.
3
Quality of life after total laparoscopic hysterectomy versus total abdominal hysterectomy for stage I endometrial cancer (LACE): a randomised trial.腹腔镜子宫切除术与开腹子宫切除术治疗Ⅰ期子宫内膜癌的生活质量比较(LACE):一项随机试验。
Lancet Oncol. 2010 Aug;11(8):772-80. doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(10)70145-5. Epub 2010 Jul 16.
4
Vesicoureteral Injury during Benign Hysterectomy: Minimally Invasive Laparoscopic Surgery versus Laparotomy.良性子宫切除术中的输尿管损伤:微创腹腔镜手术与剖腹手术比较。
J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2020 Sep-Oct;27(6):1354-1362. doi: 10.1016/j.jmig.2019.11.004. Epub 2019 Nov 16.
5
Safety of laparoscopy versus laparotomy in early-stage endometrial cancer: a randomised trial.腹腔镜与开腹手术治疗早期子宫内膜癌的安全性比较:一项随机试验。
Lancet Oncol. 2010 Aug;11(8):763-71. doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(10)70143-1. Epub 2010 Jul 16.
6
Relationship between minimally invasive hysterectomy, pelvic cytology, and lymph vascular space invasion: a single institution study of 458 patients.微创子宫切除术、盆腔细胞学和淋巴管血管间隙侵犯之间的关系:单中心 458 例患者研究。
Gynecol Oncol. 2014 May;133(2):211-5. doi: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2014.02.025. Epub 2014 Feb 28.
7
Pseudovascular Invasion: Minimally Invasive Surgery for Endometrial Cancer.假性血管侵犯:子宫内膜癌的微创手术
JSLS. 2019 Apr-Jun;23(2). doi: 10.4293/JSLS.2019.00021.
8
Effect of Total Laparoscopic Hysterectomy vs Total Abdominal Hysterectomy on Disease-Free Survival Among Women With Stage I Endometrial Cancer: A Randomized Clinical Trial.腹腔镜全子宫切除术与经腹全子宫切除术治疗Ⅰ期子宫内膜癌无病生存的效果比较:一项随机临床试验。
JAMA. 2017 Mar 28;317(12):1224-1233. doi: 10.1001/jama.2017.2068.
9
Impact of uterine manipulator on oncological outcome in endometrial cancer surgery.子宫操作器对子宫内膜癌手术中肿瘤学结果的影响。
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2021 Jan;224(1):65.e1-65.e11. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2020.07.025. Epub 2020 Jul 18.
10
Recurrence and survival after laparoscopy versus laparotomy without lymphadenectomy in early-stage endometrial cancer: Long-term outcomes of a randomised trial.早期子宫内膜癌中腹腔镜与无淋巴结切除术开腹手术后的复发和生存:一项随机试验的长期结果。
Gynecol Oncol. 2022 Feb;164(2):265-270. doi: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2021.12.019. Epub 2021 Dec 23.

引用本文的文献

1
Endometrial cancer recurrence after the use of a uterine manipulator during laparoscopic surgery.腹腔镜手术中使用子宫操纵器后子宫内膜癌复发
Gynecol Oncol Rep. 2024 Jul 26;55:101468. doi: 10.1016/j.gore.2024.101468. eCollection 2024 Oct.
2
Surgical Treatment for Endometrial Cancer, Hysterectomy Performed via Minimally Invasive Routes Compared with Open Surgery: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.子宫内膜癌的手术治疗:微创途径子宫切除术与开放手术的比较——系统评价与网状Meta分析
Cancers (Basel). 2024 May 13;16(10):1860. doi: 10.3390/cancers16101860.
3
A retrospective study of the effects of uterine manipulators on prognosis in patients with cervical cancer.回顾性研究子宫操作器对宫颈癌患者预后的影响。
J Int Med Res. 2024 Mar;52(3):3000605241233966. doi: 10.1177/03000605241233966.
4
Endometrial cancer: predictors and oncological safety of tumor tissue manipulation.子宫内膜癌:肿瘤组织操作的预测因子和肿瘤学安全性。
Clin Transl Oncol. 2024 May;26(5):1098-1105. doi: 10.1007/s12094-023-03310-6. Epub 2023 Sep 5.
5
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.
6
Radical Hysterectomy for Cervical Cancer: the Right Surgical Approach.宫颈癌根治性子宫切除术:正确的手术方式。
Curr Treat Options Oncol. 2022 Jan;23(1):1-14. doi: 10.1007/s11864-021-00919-z. Epub 2022 Feb 15.
7
Role of uterine manipulator during laparoscopic endometrial cancer treatment.子宫操纵器在腹腔镜子宫内膜癌治疗中的作用。
Transl Cancer Res. 2020 Dec;9(12):7759-7766. doi: 10.21037/tcr-20-2094.
8
Association of Myometrial Invasion With Lymphovascular Space Invasion, Lymph Node Metastasis, Recurrence, and Overall Survival in Endometrial Cancer: A Meta-Analysis of 79 Studies With 68,870 Patients.子宫肌层浸润与子宫内膜癌的淋巴管间隙浸润、淋巴结转移、复发及总生存的相关性:一项纳入79项研究共68870例患者的Meta分析
Front Oncol. 2021 Oct 21;11:762329. doi: 10.3389/fonc.2021.762329. eCollection 2021.
9
Uterine manipulator in total laparoscopic hysterectomy: safety and usefulness.腹腔镜全子宫切除术的子宫操纵器:安全性和有用性。
Updates Surg. 2020 Dec;72(4):1247-1254. doi: 10.1007/s13304-019-00681-w. Epub 2019 Oct 12.
10
Significance of abnormal peritoneal cytology on survival of women with stage I-II endometrioid endometrial cancer.异常腹膜细胞学对 I 期- II 期子宫内膜样腺癌患者生存的意义。
Gynecol Oncol. 2018 May;149(2):301-309. doi: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2018.02.012. Epub 2018 Mar 28.

本文引用的文献

1
The effect of a uterine manipulator on the recurrence and mortality of endometrial cancer: a multi-centric study by the Italian Society of Gynecological Endoscopy.子宫操作器对子宫内膜癌复发和死亡率的影响:意大利妇科内镜学会的多中心研究。
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2017 Jun;216(6):592.e1-592.e11. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2017.01.027. Epub 2017 Jan 29.
2
Cancer Statistics, 2017.《2017 年癌症统计》
CA Cancer J Clin. 2017 Jan;67(1):7-30. doi: 10.3322/caac.21387. Epub 2017 Jan 5.
3
Comparison of robot-assisted total laparoscopic hysterectomy and total abdominal hysterectomy for treatment of endometrial cancer in obese and morbidly obese patients.比较机器人辅助全腹腔镜子宫切除术和传统开腹子宫切除术治疗肥胖和病态肥胖患者子宫内膜癌的效果。
J Robot Surg. 2010 Dec;4(4):247-52. doi: 10.1007/s11701-010-0222-y. Epub 2010 Nov 11.
4
Laparoscopic treatment of early-stage endometrial cancer with and without uterine manipulator: Our experience and review of literature.使用和不使用子宫操纵器的腹腔镜治疗早期子宫内膜癌:我们的经验及文献综述
Surg Oncol. 2016 Jun;25(2):98-103. doi: 10.1016/j.suronc.2016.03.005. Epub 2016 Mar 23.
5
Association of Low-Dose Aspirin and Survival of Women With Endometrial Cancer.低剂量阿司匹林与子宫内膜癌女性生存率的关联
Obstet Gynecol. 2016 Jul;128(1):127-137. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0000000000001491.
6
Weight Change Pattern and Survival Outcome of Women with Endometrial Cancer.子宫内膜癌女性的体重变化模式与生存结局
Ann Surg Oncol. 2016 Sep;23(9):2988-97. doi: 10.1245/s10434-016-5237-9. Epub 2016 Apr 25.
7
Comparative Effectiveness of Minimally Invasive Hysterectomy for Endometrial Cancer.子宫内膜癌微创子宫切除术的比较疗效
J Clin Oncol. 2016 Apr 1;34(10):1087-96. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2015.65.3212. Epub 2016 Feb 1.
8
Timing of Intrauterine Manipulator Insertion During Minimally Invasive Surgical Staging and Results of Pelvic Cytology in Endometrial Cancer.子宫内膜癌微创外科分期术中子宫内操作器插入时机及盆腔细胞学检查结果
J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2016 Feb 1;23(2):234-41. doi: 10.1016/j.jmig.2015.10.002. Epub 2015 Oct 22.
9
Impact of depth and extent of lymphovascular space invasion on lymph node metastasis and recurrence patterns in endometrial cancer.淋巴管间隙浸润深度和范围对子宫内膜癌淋巴结转移及复发模式的影响
J Surg Oncol. 2015 Nov;112(6):669-76. doi: 10.1002/jso.24049. Epub 2015 Sep 22.
10
Lymphovascular space invasion in robotic surgery for endometrial cancer.子宫内膜癌机器人手术中的脉管间隙浸润
JSLS. 2014 Jul-Sep;18(3). doi: 10.4293/JSLS.2014.00021.