Volume 19 Issue 7
Jul.  2021
Turn off MathJax
Article Contents
Article Navigation >  Chinese Journal of General Practice  > 2021  >  19(7): 1117-1120
LIU Jian, DENG Zhao-ya, XU Jie, GAO Long-fei, SUN Yi-lin, LI Yan. Clinical analysis of modified laparoscopic extensive hysterectomy in the treatment of stage ⅠA2 - ⅠB1 cervical cancer[J]. Chinese Journal of General Practice, 2021, 19(7): 1117-1120. doi: 10.16766/j.cnki.issn.1674-4152.001999
Citation: LIU Jian, DENG Zhao-ya, XU Jie, GAO Long-fei, SUN Yi-lin, LI Yan. Clinical analysis of modified laparoscopic extensive hysterectomy in the treatment of stage ⅠA2 - ⅠB1 cervical cancer[J]. Chinese Journal of General Practice, 2021, 19(7): 1117-1120. doi: 10.16766/j.cnki.issn.1674-4152.001999
shu

Clinical analysis of modified laparoscopic extensive hysterectomy in the treatment of stage ⅠA2 - ⅠB1 cervical cancer

doi: 10.16766/j.cnki.issn.1674-4152.001999

  • Department of Gynecology and Oncology, the First Affiliated Hospital of Bengbu Medical College, Bengbu, Anhui 233004, China

Funds:

 KJ2019A0363

  • Received Date: 2021-02-04
    Available Online: 2022-02-16
    Abstract
  •   Objective  To compare the perioperative conditions of modified laparoscopic and complete laparoscopic extensive hysterectomy in patients with stage ⅠA2 - ⅠB1 cervical cancer.  Methods  Patients who were admitted at the Department of Gynecology and Oncology of the First Affiliated Hospital of Bengbu Medical College from February 2017 to June 2020 were recruited. The patients were graded as clinical stage ⅠA2 - ⅠB1 according to the International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) and received laparoscopic extensive hysterectomy for cervical cancer. The clinical pathology, surgery and postoperative recovery of patients were retrospectively analysed. A total of 30 patients were included in this study, including 15 cases of modified laparoscopic (no lifting cup and closed vaginal resection sample) and complete laparoscopic (with lifting cup) extensive hysterectomy. The operation time, blood loss, length of parauterine resection, length of vaginal wall resection, perioperative complications and postoperative recovery were compared between the two groups.  Results  No statistically significant differences were observed in the age[(50.13±7.35) years vs. (44.80±7.46) years], body mass index (24.26±3.57 vs. 23.48±3.01), FIGO staging (ⅠA2/ⅠB1: 4/11 vs. 1/14) and pathological type (squamous carcinoma/adenocarcinoma: 13/2 vs. 10/5) of the two groups of patients (all P>0.05). Moreover, no statistically significant differences were observed in the operation time[223 (204, 248) min vs. 100 (80, 300) min], intraoperative blood loss[216 (179, 251) mL vs.100 (76, 300) mL], length of vaginal wall resected[(3.32±0.20) cm vs. (3.49±0.29) cm] and length of parauterine wall[(3.25±0.27) cm vs. (3.41±0.32) cm] between the two groups (all P>0.05). In addition, no significant differences were observed in urinary retention (yes/no: 4/11 vs. 2/13), deep vein thrombosis (yes/no: 3/12 vs. 1/14), lymphatic cyst (yes/no: 6/9 vs. 8/7), postoperative supplementary treatment (yes/no: 8/7 vs. 8/7), postoperative exhaust time[(2.80±0.41) d vs. (2.79±0.43) d] and postoperative hospital stay[(5.13±1.64) d vs. (5.60±0.99) d] between the two groups of patients (all P>0.05).  Conclusion  Modified laparoscopic extensive hysterectomy has the same safety as complete laparoscopic hysterectomy and is worthy of further promotion.

     

    • FullText(HTML)
  • loading
    • References(15)
  • [1]
    赵鸣鹤, 刘倩. 宫颈癌腹腔镜手术改良方向及相关措施进展[J]. 国际妇产科学杂志, 2020, 47(6): 621-625. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1674-1870.2020.06.004
    [2]
    CIBULA D, PÖTTER R, PLANCHAMP F, et al. The European society of gynaecological oncology/european society for radiotherapy and oncology/european society of pathology guidelines for the management of patients with cervical cancer[J]. Radiother Oncol, 2018, 127(3): 404-416. doi: 10.1016/j.radonc.2018.03.003
    [3]
    NEZHAT C R, BURRELL M O, NEZHAT F R, et al. Laparoscopic radical hysterectomy with paraaortic and pelvic node dissection[J]. Am J Obstet Gynecol, 1992, 166(3): 864-865. doi: 10.1016/0002-9378(92)91351-A
    [4]
    WANG Y Z, DENG L, XU H C, et al. Laparoscopy versus laparotomy for the management of early stage cervical cancer[J]. BMC Cancer, 2015, 15: 928. doi: 10.1186/s12885-015-1818-4
    [5]
    CAO T, FENG Y, HUANG Q, et al. Prognostic and safety roles in laparoscopic versus abdominal radical hysterectomy in cervical cancer: A meta-analysis[J]. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A, 2015, 25(12): 990-998. doi: 10.1089/lap.2015.0390
    [6]
    NAM J H, PARK J Y, KIM D Y, et al. Laparoscopic versus open radical hysterectomy in early-stage cervical cancer: Long-term survival outcomes in a matched cohort study[J]. Ann Oncol, 2012, 23(4): 903-911. doi: 10.1093/annonc/mdr360
    [7]
    RAMIREZ P T, FRUMOVITZ M, PAREJA R, et al. Minimally Invasive versus abdominal radical hysterectomy for cervical cancer[J]. N Engl J Med, 2018, 379(20): 1895-1904. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1806395
    [8]
    MELAMED A, MARGUL D J, CHEN L, et al. Survival after minimally invasive radical hysterectomy for early-stage cervical cancer[J]. N Engl J Med, 2018, 379(20): 1905-1914. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1804923
    [9]
    陈春林, 郎景和, 向阳, 等. 子宫颈癌腹腔镜手术治疗的中国专家共识[J]. 中华妇产科杂志, 2020, 55(9): 579-585. doi: 10.3760/cma.j.cn112141-20200310-00202
    [10]
    KIM S I, CHO J H, SEOL A, et al. Comparison of survival outcomes between minimally invasive surgery and conventional open surgery for radical hysterectomy as primary treatment in patients with stage ⅠB1-ⅡA2 cervical cancer[J]. Gynecol Oncol, 2019, 153(1): 3-12. doi: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2019.01.008
    [11]
    YAMAGUCHI K, HIRABAYASHI Y, SHIROMIZU A, et al. Enhancement of port site metastasis by hyaluronic acid under CO2 pneumoperitoneum in a murine model[J]. Surg Endosc, 2001, 15(5): 504-507. doi: 10.1007/s004640090016
    [12]
    YU J, HUANG C, SUN Y, et al. Effect of laparoscopic vs open distal gastrectomy on 3-year disease-free survival in patients with locally advanced gastric cancer: The class-01 randomized clinical trial[J]. JAMA, 2019, 321(20): 1983-1992. doi: 10.1001/jama.2019.5359
    [13]
    UPPAL S, GEHRIG P A, PENG K, et al. Recurrence rates in patients with cervical cancer treated with abdominal versus minimally invasive radical hysterectomy: A multi-institutional retrospective review study[J]. J Clin Oncol, 2020, 38(10): 1030-1040. doi: 10.1200/JCO.19.03012
    [14]
    KOHLER C, HERTEL H, HERRMANN J, et al. Laparoscopic radical hysterectomy with transvaginal closure of vaginal cuff - a multicenter analysis[J]. Int J Gynecol Cancer, 2019, 29(5): 845-850. doi: 10.1136/ijgc-2019-000388
    [15]
    陆婕, 吴晓杰, 朱巍立. 根治性宫颈癌手术患者盆腔淋巴结转移和预后的影响因素分析[J]. 中华全科医学, 2017, 15(2): 270-273. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-SYQY201702027.htm
    • Relative Articles
    • Supplements(0)
    • Cited By
  • 加载中

Catalog

    通讯作者: 陈斌, bchen63@163.com
    • 1. 

      沈阳化工大学材料科学与工程学院 沈阳 110142

    1. 本站搜索
    2. 百度学术搜索
    3. 万方数据库搜索
    4. CNKI搜索

    Tables(3)

    Get Citation
    PDF
    XML

    Article Metrics

    Article views (153) PDF downloads(2) Cited by()
    Proportional views
    Related

    Address：No. 287, Changhuai Road, Bengbu, Anhui Province, 233004, P.R.ChinaphoneNo：0552-3066635； 0552-3051890Email：zhqkyx@163.com

    Copyright © Chinese Journal of General Practice皖ICP备2020018345号-2

    Supported by: Beijing Renhe Information Technology Co., Ltd.    

    /

    DownLoad:  Full-Size Img  PowerPoint
    Return
    Return