Division of Gynecologic Oncology, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Gynecologic Oncology, Odette Cancer Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2020 Dec;30(12):1864-1870. doi: 10.1136/ijgc-2020-001816. Epub 2020 Oct 9.
Minimally invasive radical hysterectomy is associated with decreased survival in patients with early cervical cancer. The objective of this study was to determine whether the use of an intra-uterine manipulator at the time of laparoscopic or robotic radical hysterectomy is associated with inferior oncologic outcomes.
A retrospective cohort study was carried out of all patients with cervical cancer (squamous cell carcinoma, adenocarcinoma or adenosquamous carcinoma) International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics 2009 stages IA1 (with positive lymphovascular space invasion) to IIA who underwent minimally invasive radical hysterectomy at two academic centers between January 2007 and December 2017. Treatment, tumor characteristics, and survival data were retrieved from hospital records.
A total of 224 patients were identified at the two centers; 115 had surgery with the use of an intra-uterine manipulator while 109 did not; 53 were robotic and 171 were laparoscopic. Median age was 44 years (range 38-54) and median body mass index was 25.8 kg/m (range 16.6-51.5). Patients in whom an intra-uterine manipulator was not used at the time of minimally invasive radical hysterectomy were more likely to have residual disease at hysterectomy (p<0.001), positive lymphovascular space invasion (p=0.02), positive margins (p=0.008), and positive lymph node metastasis (p=0.003). Recurrence-free survival at 5 years was 80% in the no intra-uterine manipulator group and 94% in the intra-uterine manipulator group. After controlling for the presence of residual cancer at hysterectomy, tumor size and high-risk pathologic criteria (positive margins, parametria or lymph nodes), the use of an intra-uterine manipulator was no longer significantly associated with worse recurrence-free survival (HR 0.4, 95% CI 0.2 to 1.0, p=0.05). The only factor which was consistently associated with recurrence-free survival was tumor size (HR 2.1, 95% CI 1.5 to 3.0, for every 10 mm increase, p<0.001).
After controlling for adverse pathological factors, the use of an intra-uterine manipulator in patients with early cervical cancer who underwent minimally invasive radical hysterectomy was not an independent factor associated with rate of recurrence.
微创根治性子宫切除术与早期宫颈癌患者的生存率降低有关。本研究的目的是确定在腹腔镜或机器人根治性子宫切除术中使用宫内操作器是否与较差的肿瘤学结果相关。
对 2007 年 1 月至 2017 年 12 月在两个学术中心接受微创根治性子宫切除术的两位学术中心的所有国际妇产科联合会(FIGO)2009 年 IA1 期(伴阳性淋巴血管空间侵犯)至 IIA 期宫颈癌(鳞癌、腺癌或腺鳞癌)患者进行了回顾性队列研究。从病历中检索治疗、肿瘤特征和生存数据。
在两个中心共确定了 224 例患者;115 例行手术时使用宫内操作器,109 例未使用;53 例为机器人手术,171 例为腹腔镜手术。中位年龄为 44 岁(范围 38-54 岁),中位体重指数为 25.8kg/m(范围 16.6-51.5kg/m)。在微创根治性子宫切除术中未使用宫内操作器的患者在子宫切除术中更有可能存在残留疾病(p<0.001)、淋巴血管空间侵犯阳性(p=0.02)、边缘阳性(p=0.008)和淋巴结转移阳性(p=0.003)。无宫内操作器组 5 年无复发生存率为 80%,宫内操作器组为 94%。在控制子宫切除术后残留癌症的存在、肿瘤大小和高危病理标准(边缘阳性、宫旁或淋巴结)后,宫内操作器的使用与无复发生存率无显著相关性(HR 0.4,95%CI 0.2 至 1.0,p=0.05)。唯一与无复发生存率相关的因素是肿瘤大小(HR 2.1,95%CI 1.5 至 3.0,每增加 10mm,p<0.001)。
在控制不良病理因素后,在接受微创根治性子宫切除术的早期宫颈癌患者中使用宫内操作器并不是与复发率相关的独立因素。