Oncologic and Fertility Outcomes After Simple Trachelectomy in Women With Early Cervical Cancer.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to present our case series of patients with early-stage cervical cancer undergoing simple trachelectomy (ST). Currently, radical trachelectomy is considered the most appropriate fertility-preserving procedure for the treatment of early-stage cervical cancer. However, there is increasing debate on the appropriate radicality of the surgery to preserve oncologic safety. DESIGN: Descriptive retrospective analysis of patient records and evaluation of questionnaires. SETTING: 2 gynecologic oncologic centers, surgeries performed by one surgical team. PATIENTS: 36 women with early-stage cervical cancer undergoing ST. INTERVENTIONS: Laparoscopic assisted simple vaginal trachelectomy. MEASUREMENTS: Demographic, histologic, fertility, and follow-up data of all patients who underwent ST between April 2007 and July 2021 were prospectively recorded and retrospectively analyzed. MAIN RESULTS: A total of 36 women (mean age: 28 years) underwent ST of whom 81% were nulliparous. Indications for ST were multifocal International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics stage IA1 (n = 30), stage IA1 L1 (n = 1), stage IA2 (n = 2), and stage IB1 (n = 3). Mandatory staging procedure was laparoscopic pelvic lymphadenectomy, including bilateral sentinel biopsy in 92% of the cases and systematic in 8%. Residual tumor was histologically confirmed in 8 specimens (22%); 18 women (50%) were seeking parenthood, and 13 succeeded (72%). There were 16 live births, all on term, with a median fetal weight of 3110 grams (2330-4420). One patient had a medical abortion owing to fetal congenital malformation. One pregnancy is ongoing. After a median follow-up of 91.5 months (9-174), all women are alive with no evidence of disease. CONCLUSION: ST represents a de-escalation compared with radical trachelectomy and provides excellent oncologic results with an outstanding fertility rate and obstetric outcome for patients with early cervical cancer. However, clear indications for this tailored fertility-preserving surgery have to be defined in well-designed trials.

Quality of breaking bad news to patients diagnosed with neoplasia of the uterine cervix.

OBJECTIVE: Little is known about the quality of receiving bad news (BN) for women diagnosed with cervical neoplasia. We evaluated adherence to the SPIKES protocol in three cohorts of women with different stages of the disease and treatment modalities. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We included women with cervical cancer who underwent radical vaginal trachelectomy (RVT group, n = 110), radical hysterectomy or chemo-radiation (HE/RCT group, n = 101), and women with CIN 3 treated by loop excision (CIN group, n = 108). We asked the participants about how they received the bad news delivery in reality and how they would envision an ideal communication process based on the main items of the SPIKES protocol. The participants filled out a questionnaire with 38 items of the Marburg Breaking Bad News (MABBAN) Scale representing the six SPIKES subscales. RESULTS: Only 72% of all patients reported being satisfied with their BBN experience. The following factors were considered important by 90% of the patients: an undisturbed atmosphere, taking enough time, coherent explanation of the disease, and the possibility to ask questions. However, the reality of their experiences fell significantly short of their expectations. Asking about the patient's knowledge of the disease, addressing their concerns, allowing them to show emotions, providing clarity about the change in quality of life, informing them about alternative therapies, and involving them in further planning were also significantly lacking in the actual BBN encounters compared to the patients' preferences. The experience of RVT patients was more negative compared to the HE/RCT patients (p = 0.036). The CIN patients had an overall satisfactory impression (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: The process of breaking bad news in German women diagnosed with cervical neoplasia requires substantial improvement. The SPIKES protocol can be used as a guideline for enhancement but should be supplemented by incorporating a second consultation as the norm rather than the exception. Continuous monitoring and improvement of the quality of BBN is recommended for all oncologic institutions, utilizing the MABBAN questionnaire as a valuable tool.

Loop Excision for Precancers of the Uterine Cervix: Local or General Anaesthetic?

Aim: In Germany, treatment of HSIL or AIS of the uterine cervix by loop excision is performed almost exclusively under general anaesthesia (GA). International studies and guidelines show high acceptance of local anaesthesia (LA) due to hermeneutic, medical, and economic factors. We performed an observational comparative study aiming to prove advantages of local anaesthesia within the German health system. Patients and Methods: In a prospective observational study, patients diagnosed with HSIL or AIS of the uterine cervix were treated at the Institute for Cytology and Dysplasia, Berlin, by loop excision in 2021. We started with a feasibility study : 303 patients diagnosed with HSIL/AIS of the uterine cervix and her colposcopist answered an electronic questionnaire with respect to loop excision under LA. Since we found a high acceptance for LA in patients and colposcopists, we initiated a comparative study LA vs. GA: 322 patients underwent loop excision and selected their mode of anaesthesia: n = 206 LA vs. n = 116 GA. 114 patients of the feasibility study had to undergo loop excision and became part of the comparative study (n = 79 for the LA group, n = 35 for the GA group). All patients received a standardised questionnaire to document their pain score within 24 h after treatment on a visual analogue scale, i.e. VAS, between 0 and 100. 178 patients of the LA group and 80 patients of the GA group completed and returned the questionnaire and form the cohort for our comparison of LA vs. GA. With 191 of these 258 patients, i.e. 74%, a telephone survey was performed to ask for patient satisfaction and the rates of recurrence after a mean interval of 1 year post surgery. We postulate that there will be no clinically relevant significant difference in satisfaction and postoperative pain between patients in the LA group and the GA group. Results: In the feasibility study , 90% (272 of 303) of patients diagnosed with HSIL or AIS were considered eligible for LA by their colposcopists. 75% (227 of 303) of patients were open to loop excision under LA. In the comparative study , 63 of 206 women of the LA group were interviewed preoperatively: 89% would accept a pain score above 20 during the procedure, 33% a pain score above 50 and 11% of max. 20. Postoperatively, the median VAS pain score for loop excision under local anaesthesia was 13.1 in 178 patients, and pain during injection of local anaesthesia was 20.9 (p < 0.001). The VAS pain score 20 minutes post surgery did not differ significantly between 178 patients after local anaesthesia versus 80 patients after general anaesthesia (p = 0.09). The surgeons estimated the patient's pain significantly less than the patients themselves with an underestimate of -14.63 points on the VAS (p < 0.001). Within 7 days following loop excision under LA, 95.5% of 178 patients would choose local anaesthesia as their preferred method for a potential repeat loop excision, 8.8% of which would like additional painkillers, and 4.5% would choose general anaesthesia.In a telephone follow-up survey of 133 women from the LA group after a mean of 12 months post surgery, 97% were "satisfied" or "very satisfied" with the treatment carried out. For patient satisfaction and postoperative pain, no clinically relevant significant difference was seen between the LA and the GA group.The rate of secondary bleeding (6.7% vs. 8.1%, p = 0.72), recurrence of HSIL/AIS (3.6% vs. 5.2%, p = 0.62), and the distribution of the histopathological R status (R0 89.5% vs. 81.1%, p = 0.73; R1 5.3% vs.12.2%, p = 0.57, Rx 4.1% vs. 5.4%, p = 0.65) showed no significant difference when comparing the LA group versus the GA group. Conclusion: Following loop excision under local anaesthesia, more than 95% of patients would choose this method again for repeat surgery. One year post surgery, 97% of the patients were "satisfied" or "very satisfied" with the treatment under local anaesthesia. Offering local anaesthesia for loop excision to patients should be mandatory and included in current guidelines.

Fertility sparing therapy in women with lymph node negative cervical cancer >2cm - oncologic and fertility outcomes of neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by radical vaginal trachelectomy.

OBJECTIVE: Simple or radical trachelectomy are accepted fertility sparing therapies for patients diagnosed with cervical cancer ≤2 cm. In patients with larger tumors a fertility sparing concept is considered experimental. The aim of our study is to present oncological and fertility outcomes of laparoscopic pelvic lymphadenectomy followed by neoadjuvant chemotherapy and subsequent radical vaginal trachelectomy. These procedures were performed in two centers in patients diagnosed with cervical cancer of diameter >2 cm. METHOD: We retrospectively analyzed the demographic, histological, fertility and follow-up data of all patients with cervical cancer assessed as stage IB2, IB3 or IIA1 under the International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) 2018 system. These patients had undergone pelvic lymphadenectomy, followed by neoadjuvant chemotherapy and radical vaginal trachelectomy between February 2006 and June 2020 at Charité University Berlin and Asklepios Hospital, Hamburg. RESULTS: A total of 31 patients (mean age 29.5 years, range; 26-40) underwent neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by radical vaginal trachelectomy in case of proven tumor-free lymph nodes. Twenty-six (84%) of these patients were nulliparous. Across all 31 patients, the initial tumor stages were FIGO 2018 stage IB2 (n=27), IB3 (n=3) and IIA1 (n=1).Lymphadenectomy was completed in all but one patient (sentinel) with a median of 33 (range; 11-47) pelvic lymph nodes. The neoadjuvant chemotherapy regimen was two cycles of paclitaxel, ifosfamide and cisplatin in 17 patients; three cycles of paclitaxel, ifosfamide and cisplatin in eight patients; two cycles of paclitaxel and cisplatin in four patients; two cylces cisplatin monoagent in one patient; and two cycles of paclitaxel and cisplatin followed by two cycles of paclitaxel, ifosfamide and cisplatin in one patient. Residual tumor was histologically confirmed in 17 specimens (55%). The median residual tumor size following neoadjuvant chemotherapy was 12 mm (range; 1-60). Fertility could be preserved in 27 patients (87%); two patients underwent adjuvant chemoradiation after radical vaginal trachelectomy due to high-risk histological features; two other patients underwent radical hysterectomy with adjuvant chemoradiation therapy following neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Of 18 (67%) patients seeking motherhood, 13 became pregnant (72%). There were 12 live births in 10 women, with a median fetal weight of 2490 grams (range; 1640-3560) and five miscarriages. After a median follow-up of 94.5 months (range; 6-183) three recurrences (11.1%) were detected, one patient (3.7%) died of the disease. CONCLUSION: Neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by radical vaginal trachelectomy may be offered to patients seeking motherhood with cervical cancer >2 cm and histopathologically tumor-free lymph nodes, the rate of healthy baby pregnancy on discharge was 10/18 women (55%). This fertility-preserving strategy is associated with higher recurrence and death compared with what was published in the literature for women undergoing radical vaginal trachelectomy for tumors up to 2 cm.