Predictors of recurrence following laparoscopic radical hysterectomy for early-stage cervical cancer: A multi-institutional study.

Introduction Recent findings show a detrimental impact of the minimally invasive approach on patients with early stage cervical cancer (ECC). Reasons beyond these results are unclear. The aim of the present article is to investigate the possible role of peritoneal contamination during intracorporeal colpotomy. Methods patients with early stage cervical cancer were divided into 2 groups: no intraperitoneal exposure (N-IPE) intraperitoneal exposure (IPE) during minimally invasive surgery. Patients of the 2 groups were propensity-matched according to the major risk factors. Results 226 cases of the IPE group had a significant worst prognosis than the 142 cases of the N-IPE group (4.5-years disease free survival: 86.6% vs 95.9% respectively, p = 0.005), while N-IPE had similar survival to open surgery (4.5-years disease free survival: 95.0% vs 90.5% respectively, p = 0.164). Distant recurrence was more frequent among IPE patients with a borderline significance (3.5% vs 0.4% among IPE and N-IPE respectively, p = 0.083). On multivariate analysis, intraperitoneal tumor exposure was an independent prognostic factors for worse survival; patients belonging to the N-IPE group had a risk of recurrence of about 3-fold lower compared to patients of the IPE group (hazard ratio: 0.37, 95% confidence interval: 0.15–0.88, p = 0.025). Conclusion it would be advisable that further prospective studies investigating the efficacy of different surgical approach in ECC take into consideration of this issue. Moreover, all other measures that could potentially prevent peritoneal exposure of tumor should be adopted during minimally invasive surgery for early stage cervical cancer to provide higher survival outcomes.

Investigating the possible impact of peritoneal tumor exposure amongst women with early stage cervical cancer treated with minimally invasive approach

https://www.gynecologiconcology-online.net/article/S0090-8258(20)33832-4/pdf

Survival outcomes in patients with cervical cancer treated with open versus robotic radical hysterectomy: Our surgical pathology interrogation.

This paper reviews the recent literature data on minimally invasive surgical approach to early cervical cancer compared to abdominal approach, with the aim of evaluate the oncological outcomes and the appropriateness of current indications. A recent multicenter randomized controlled trial and a concurrent large epidemiological study, contrary to the previous retrospective data, showed that minimally invasive surgery is associated with significantly poorer survival than the open approach. Open surgery is to be considered the standard of care for early cervical cancer as implemented in the current guidelines, and the patients must be carefully counseled if minimally invasive surgery is offered. Minimally invasive surgery can be considered safe only for sentinel lymph node mapping in a fertility-sparing setting and could be considered after preoperative conization and for small tumors, adopting preventive surgical maneuvers and in reference centers. However, prospective evidences about the suggested indications are not yet available.

Surgical Management of Early Cervical Cancer: When Is Laparoscopic Appropriate?

Background Recently, it has been sustained that only surgeons skilled in minimally invasive radical hysterectomy (MI-RH) could provide valuable oncological outcomes in early-stage cervical cancer. Still, literature lacks data correlating surgeon experience with patient survival rate. We aimed to investigate the impact of surgeon training on this rate. Methods This is a retrospective study of 243 early-stage cervical cancer treated with MI-RH. Multiple regression analyses were undertaken to investigate the impact of the surgeons learning curve, according to the number of MI-RH, on patients prognosis. Results A steady trend of reduction in disease recurrence risk is associated with increased surgeon experience. The peak of the learning curve was shown at the 19th MI-RH (hazard ratio of disease-free survival: 0.321; 95%CI: 0.140-0.737; p= 0.007). The 3 years disease-free survival that a surgeon could provide to patients is significantly lower at the beginning of his/her learning path comparing to what he/she could guarantee once adequate experience had been achieved (75.4% and 91.6% respectively, p=0.005). Surgeon experience appears to be an independent prognostic factor. Conclusion The experience that a surgeon can achieve practicing in MI-RH significantly influences oncological outcomes of early-stage cervical cancer patients. Future studies comparing minimally invasive and open surgery should take this into account. It would be advisable that the scientific community precisely establishes the minimum training required in the field of MI-RH for early-stage cervical cancer.

/pdf/impact-of-surgeon-learning-curve-in-minimally-invasive-xlgmab11g8.pdf

Rick Estape

Papers

The LACC Trial and Minimally Invasive Surgery in Cervical Cancer