Safety of vaginal surgery for early-stage cervical cancer: A retrospective multicenter cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: Abdominal Radical hysterectomy (ARH) with pelvic lymph node assessment is considered the standard treatment for early-stage cervical cancer. Accepted routes have previously included laparoscopic or robotic approaches (LRH). Laparoscopy-assisted vaginal or vaginal radical hysterectomy (LVRH) are performed in some centers. The objective of this study is to compare surgical and oncological outcomes of LVRH, to laparoscopic and abdominal approaches. DESIGN PATIENTS SETTING: A retrospective multicenter analysis of consecutive cervical cancer cases who underwent a radical hysterectomy between 2007 and 2017 in eleven regional cancer centers across Canada. MEASUREMENTS: A comparison of patients stratified by surgical technique was undertaken. T-test, Wilcoxon rank-sum and chi-square were used to compare patient characteristics. Log-rank tests and Cox proportional hazards models were employed to compare recurrence and survival across surgical groups. MAIN RESULTS: A total of 1071 patients with cervical cancer stage IA1 with lymphovascular invasion to stage IIIC (FIGO 2018) <4 cm were identified. Postoperative complication rate was lowest for women undergoing LVRH (9.1 %, vs 18.3 % and 22.1 % for minimally invasive and open respectively). During follow up, 114 women recurred, and 70 women died. 5-year recurrence-free survival was 85.4 % for LRH, 89.4 % for ARH and 92.2 % for LVRH. LVRH was not found to be associated with a higher risk of recurrence or death than ARH on multivariable analysis (aHR for recurrence 0.62, CI 0.21-1.77; aHR for death 0.63, CI 0.14-2.77) CONCLUSION: In this retrospective study, vaginal or laparoscopy-assisted vaginal radical hysterectomy for cervical cancer was associated with favorable perioperative and oncological outcomes.

Oncologic Outcomes of Surgically Treated Cervical Cancer with No Residual Disease on Hysterectomy Specimen: A 4C (Canadian Cervical Cancer Collaborative) Working Group Study.

Minimally invasive surgery for the treatment of macroscopic cervical cancer leads to worse oncologic outcomes than with open surgery. Preoperative conization may mitigate the risk of surgical approach. Our objective was to describe the oncologic outcomes in cases of cervical cancer initially treated with conization, and subsequently found to have no residual cervical cancer after hysterectomy performed via open and minimally invasive approaches. This was a retrospective cohort study of surgically treated cervical cancer at 11 Canadian institutions from 2007 to 2017. Cases initially treated with cervical conization and subsequent hysterectomy, with no residual disease on hysterectomy specimen were included. They were subdivided according to minimally invasive (laparoscopic/robotic (MIS) or laparoscopically assisted vaginal/vaginal hysterectomy (LVH)), or abdominal (AH). Recurrence free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS) were estimated using Kaplan-Meier analysis. Chi-square and log-rank tests were used to compare between cohorts. Within the total cohort, 238/1696 (14%) had no residual disease on hysterectomy specimen (122 MIS, 103 AH, and 13 VLH). The majority of cases in the cohort were FIGO 2018 stage IB1 (43.7%) and underwent a radical hysterectomy (81.9%). There was no statistical difference between stage, histology, and radical vs simple hysterectomy between the abdominal and minimally invasive groups. There were no significant differences in RFS (5-year: MIS/LVH 97.7%, AH 95.8%, p = 0.23) or OS (5-year: MIS/VLH 98.9%, AH 97.4%, p = 0.10), although event-rates were low. There were only two recurrences. In this large study including only patients with no residual cervical cancer on hysterectomy specimen, no significant differences in survival were seen by surgical approach. This may be due to the small number of events or due to no actual difference between the groups. Further studies are warranted.