Surgical innovation · 2013
Nerve-sparing minilaparoscopic versus conventional laparoscopic radical hysterectomy plus systematic pelvic lymphadenectomy in cervical cancer patients.
СтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Ghezzi Fabio, Cromi Antonella, Uccella Stefano, Bogani Giorgio, Sturla Davide, Serati Maurizio, Bolis Pierfrancesco
Аннотация
AIM: To present our preliminary experience with nerve-sparing minilaparoscopic radical hysterectomy plus pelvic lymphadenectomy for the surgical treatment of cervical cancer and to compare outcomes with those of the conventional laparoscopic approach.
METHODS: Data of 87 consecutive women who underwent minimally invasive surgery for early and locally advanced stage cervical cancer were prospectively collected. Ten women who underwent laparoscopic surgery using a nerve-sparing technique performed through 3-mm ancillary ports were compared with the 77 patients who had standard laparoscopic surgery previously with 3 sovrapubic 5-mm trocars.
RESULTS: Minilaparoscopic radical hysterectomy was successfully accomplished in every case with no conversion to standard laparoscopy or open surgery. Two (2.6%) conversions to open surgery occurred in the conventional laparoscopy group. Surgical characteristics (operative time, estimated blood loss, and length of stay) and complication rate were similar between the 2 groups. No differences in the amount of parametrial and vaginal tissue removed were observed. The number of lymph nodes retrieved through minilaparoscopy was higher than conventional laparoscopy (30 [range = 26-38] vs 22 [range = 8-49]; P = .002). However, no difference was observed when the analysis was restricted to the last 10 conventional procedures (30 [range = 26-38] vs 29 [range = 24-49]; P = .81).
CONCLUSIONS: Our data show that minilaparoscopic radical hysterectomy with pelvic lymphadenectomy is a feasible procedure if performed by skilled surgeons.
METHODS: Data of 87 consecutive women who underwent minimally invasive surgery for early and locally advanced stage cervical cancer were prospectively collected. Ten women who underwent laparoscopic surgery using a nerve-sparing technique performed through 3-mm ancillary ports were compared with the 77 patients who had standard laparoscopic surgery previously with 3 sovrapubic 5-mm trocars.
RESULTS: Minilaparoscopic radical hysterectomy was successfully accomplished in every case with no conversion to standard laparoscopy or open surgery. Two (2.6%) conversions to open surgery occurred in the conventional laparoscopy group. Surgical characteristics (operative time, estimated blood loss, and length of stay) and complication rate were similar between the 2 groups. No differences in the amount of parametrial and vaginal tissue removed were observed. The number of lymph nodes retrieved through minilaparoscopy was higher than conventional laparoscopy (30 [range = 26-38] vs 22 [range = 8-49]; P = .002). However, no difference was observed when the analysis was restricted to the last 10 conventional procedures (30 [range = 26-38] vs 29 [range = 24-49]; P = .81).
CONCLUSIONS: Our data show that minilaparoscopic radical hysterectomy with pelvic lymphadenectomy is a feasible procedure if performed by skilled surgeons.