Comparison of survival outcomes between laparoscopic and abdominal radical hysterectomy for early-stage cervical cancer: A French multicentric study.

OBJECTIVES

A recent randomized controlled trial has reconsidered the use of laparoscopy for treating patients with early-stage cervical cancer with radical hysterectomy (RH). We aimed to evaluate if surgical approach had an impact on surgical and oncological outcomes in these patients in a French setting.

METHODS

Data of 1706 patients with cervical cancer treated between 1996 and 2017 were extracted from maintained databases of 9 French University hospitals. Patients, with FIGO stage IA2 to IIB tumors, treated by radical hysterectomy were selected for further analysis. A propensity score matching was used with a ratio of 2:1 in favor of laparoscopic approach was used. The Kaplan Meier method was used to estimate the survival distribution.

RESULTS

34 patients treated with laparotomy were matched with 61 patients treated by minimally invasive surgery (MIS). There was no difference regarding overall survival (91 % vs 81 %, p > 0.05) or disease-free survival (82 % vs 78 %, p > 0.05). There was no difference regarding surgical outcomes with no excess of postoperative complication in patients with MIS. Hospital stay was significantly longer in patients operated on laparotomy.

CONCLUSION

In our study, there was no evidence of a difference in survival between minimally invasive surgery and laparotomy in patients treated with radical hysterectomy for early-stage cervical cancer.