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

ABSTRACT

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 21 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.