Comparative Outcomes of Laparoscopic Radical Hysterectomy and Nerve-Sparing Technique in Cervical Cancer Patients
1Citations
1Influential
Aim was to analyze and compare the oncological outcomes, genitourinary quality of life (QOL), disease-free survival (DFS), and overall survival (OS) of patients treated by laparoscopic radical hysterectomy (LRH) and laparoscopic nerve-sparing radical hysterectomy (LNSRH) for early cervical cancer. Retrospective study in patients of carcinoma cervix FIGO (2009) grade 1A to 2A1 from January 1, 2016 until the publication of Laparoscopic Approach to Cervical Cancer (LACC) trial in 2018, after which only 1A and 1B1 were included up to December 31, 2020. Total of 285 patients operated over 5 years at the center were placed in 2 groups, LRH and LNSRH, based on surgical approach. Tumor characteristics, clinical profile, tumor clearance, histopathology, adjuvant treatment, period of follow-up and recurrence were compared. The QOL was analyzed in terms of bladder and sexual function. LNSRH group had significantly faster recovery of bladder (lesser number of days required for PVR <50 mL, quicker catheter removal time, less requirement of self-catheterization, less incidence of urinary retention and incontinence) and sexual function as compared to LRH group. There was no significant difference in radicality of the procedure. None of them had vault recurrences. DFS at 5 years for LRH and LNSRH was 95.3% and 94.1%, respectively. OS at 2 years for LRH and LNSRH was 95.9% and 96.3%, respectively, whereas the OS at 5 years was 95.3% and 94.1%, respectively. LNSRH group had significantly better genitourinary QOL as compared to the LRH group without compromising on oncological clearance. The survival is comparable to the results of open surgery in LACC trial.