Radical Hysterectomy: Efficacy and Safety in the Dawn of Minimally Invasive Techniques.

STUDY OBJECTIVE

To analyze the effect that the introduction of minimally invasive procedures has had on surgical and oncologic outcomes when compared with conventional open radical hysterectomy (ORH) in a national reference cancer after 17 years of experience in radical hysterectomy.

DESIGN

A prospective controlled study (Canadian Task Force classification II-2).

SETTING

A university teaching hospital.

PATIENTS

All patients who underwent radical hysterectomy as primary treatment for cervical cancer in our institution between May 1999 and June 2016, with a total of 188 patients.

INTERVENTIONS

Patients underwent ORH or minimally invasive surgery (MIS) (i.e., laparoscopic or robotically assisted radical hysterectomy).

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Seventy-six patients underwent ORH, 90 laparoscopic radical hysterectomy, and 22 robotically assisted radical hysterectomy. Blood loss and hospital stay were inferior in the MIS group (p <.0001). The laparotomic group presented shorter operation times (p = .0001). With a median follow-up of 112.4 months, a total of 156 patients (83%) were alive and free of disease at the time of the data analysis. Overall survival was higher in the MIS group when compared with the ORH group (91 vs 78.9, p = .026). There were no differences regarding recurrence rates between the surgical approaches.

CONCLUSION

With 1 of the largest follow-up periods in the literature, this study provides added evidence that MIS could become the preferable surgical approach for early-stage cervical cancer since it appears to reduce morbidity without affecting oncologic results.