| Summary: | Jianfeng Guo,* Lu Yang,* Jing Cai, Linjuan Xu, Jie Min, Yi Shen, Zhoufang Xiong, Weihong Dong, Vichitra Bunyamanop, Zehua Wang Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Union Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan 430022, China *These authors contributed equally to this work Objective: To compare clinical outcomes in laparoscopic and open radical hysterectomy with pelvic lymphadenectomy (LRH) in early cervical cancer without the selection bias. Methods: One special retrospective study was conducted with more than 400 patients involved in laparoscopic procedure. Results: Our results suggest that estimated blood loss and transfusion requirements were significantly lower in the LRH group. Postoperative hospital stay was also significantly shorter in the LRH group. Significant difference was found in the number of pelvic lymph nodes retrieved between the LRH and open radical hysterectomy with pelvic lymphadenectomy (ORH) groups. There were no differences in operating time, perioperative complications, progression-free survival, and overall survival between the LRH and ORH groups. Conclusion: LRH can be considered a safe and effective alternative to conventional open surgery (ORH) for early-stage cervical cancer. Keywords: early cervical cancer, clinical outcomes, laparoscopic radical hysterectomy, pelvic lymphadenectomy, retrospective study
|
|---|
