Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Tongji Hospital Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan.
State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Centre, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou.
Int J Surg. 2023 Jun 1;109(6):1688-1698. doi: 10.1097/JS9.0000000000000417.
Local excision as the main alternative for fertility-sparing surgery (FSS) has been widely used in patients with early-stage cervical cancer to achieve fertility preservation, but its safety and practicability are still questioned. Therefore, The authors evaluated the current application of local excision in early-stage cervical cancer with this population-based study and compared its efficacy with hysterectomy.
Women diagnosed with International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) stage I cervical cancer at childbearing age (18-49 years) recorded in the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) database from 2000 to 2017 were included. Overall survival (OS) and disease-specific survival (DSS) rates were compared between local excision and hysterectomy.
A total of 18 519 patients of reproductive age with cervical cancer were included, and 2268 deaths were observed. 17.0% of patients underwent FSS via local excision, and 70.1% underwent hysterectomy. Among patients younger than 39 years, OS and DSS of local excision were comparable to those of hysterectomy, whereas, in patients older than 40 years, OS and DSS of local excision were significantly worse than those of hysterectomy. In addition, OS and DSS of local excision were similar to hysterectomy in patients with stage IA cervical cancer, but OS and DSS were inferior to hysterectomy in patients with stage IB cervical cancer who underwent local excision.
For patients without fertility requirements, hysterectomy remains the best therapeutic option. However, for patients under 40 years of age diagnosed with stage IA cervical cancer, FSS via local excision is a viable option that can achieve a well-balanced outcome between tumour control and fertility preservation.
局部切除术作为保留生育功能手术(FSS)的主要替代方法,已广泛应用于早期宫颈癌患者,以实现生育力保存,但安全性和实用性仍存在争议。因此,作者通过基于人群的研究评估了局部切除术在早期宫颈癌中的当前应用,并将其与子宫切除术进行了比较。
纳入了 2000 年至 2017 年在监测、流行病学和最终结果(SEER)数据库中诊断为生育年龄(18-49 岁)的国际妇产科联合会(FIGO)I 期宫颈癌的女性。比较局部切除术和子宫切除术的总生存率(OS)和疾病特异性生存率(DSS)。
共纳入 18519 例生育年龄宫颈癌患者,观察到 2268 例死亡。17.0%的患者行局部切除术行 FSS,70.1%的患者行子宫切除术。在 39 岁以下的患者中,局部切除术的 OS 和 DSS 与子宫切除术相当,而在 40 岁以上的患者中,局部切除术的 OS 和 DSS 明显低于子宫切除术。此外,IA 期宫颈癌患者中,局部切除术的 OS 和 DSS 与子宫切除术相似,但 IB 期宫颈癌患者中,局部切除术的 OS 和 DSS 不如子宫切除术。
对于无生育要求的患者,子宫切除术仍然是最佳治疗选择。然而,对于诊断为 IA 期宫颈癌且年龄在 40 岁以下的患者,局部切除术行 FSS 是一种可行的选择,可以在肿瘤控制和生育力保存之间实现良好的平衡。