Format

Send to

Choose Destination
See comment in PubMed Commons below
J Am Assoc Gynecol Laparosc. 2002 Nov;9(4):481-7.

Comparison of laparoscopic and conventional surgery in the treatment of early cervical cancer.

Author information

1
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Linkou Medical Center, 5 Fu-Hsin Street, Kwei-Shan, Tao-Yuan, Taiwan.

Abstract

STUDY OBJECTIVE:

To compare efficacy, results, and complications of laparoscopic-assisted radical hysterectomy (LARH) and pelvic lymphadenectomy with abdominal radical hysterectomy (ARH) and pelvic lymphadenectomy in management of early (stages 1a2, 1b) invasive cervical carcinoma.

DESIGN:

Prospective cohort study (Canadian Task Force classification II-2).

SETTING:

University-affiliated hospital.

PATIENTS:

Sixty women enrolled for radical hysterectomy as most appropriate primary treatment.

INTERVENTION:

Radical hysterectomy performed by laparoscopy or laparotomy.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS:

Thirty patients each underwent LARH and ARH. The groups did not differ in terms of age, weight, disease stage, operating time, and hospital stay. Mean blood loss was 962 +/- 543 ml for ARH and 450 +/- 284 ml for LARH. No laparoscopic procedure was converted to laparotomy. There was no significant difference in intraoperative and postoperative complications. There was no significant difference in recurrence rates.

CONCLUSION:

LARH with pelvic lymphadenectomy does not increase recurrence rates and morbidity when performed by experienced endoscopists and oncologists.

PMID:
12386360
[Indexed for MEDLINE]
PubMed Commons home

PubMed Commons

0 comments
How to join PubMed Commons

    Supplemental Content

    Loading ...
    Support Center