Laparoscopic versus open radical hysterectomy in women with early stage cervical cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

  • Tanitra Tantitamit
  • , Kuan Gen Huang
  • , Chyi Long Lee*
  • *Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalReview articlepeer-review

18 Scopus citations

Abstract

This review aimed to evaluate the short term and long-term outcomes of laparoscopic radical hysterectomy (LRH) versus abdominal radical hysterectomy (ARH) for early-stage cervical cancer. A search of PubMed, Medline and Scopus databased from 2000 to 2018 was conducted. Thirty studies were retrieved including 22 retrospective cohort studies and 8 prospective cohort studies. LRH was comparable with ARH in 5-year overall survival (RR = 1.0. 95%CI 0.98–1.03; p = 0.33) and 5-year disease-free survival (RR = 1.02 95%CI 0.97–1.06; p = 0.98). The majority of included studies reported the negative cancer factors which drive adjuvant therapy were similar between two approaches. LRH was associated with lower blood loss and blood transfusion, less postoperative complication, shorter hospital stays and similar intraoperative complication rate compared to ARH. Our data suggested LRH for early-stage cervical cancer was as safe and effective in terms of long-term outcomes, but with lower surgical morbidities.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)481-488
Number of pages8
JournalTaiwanese Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology
Volume59
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - 07 2020
Externally publishedYes

Bibliographical note

Publisher Copyright:
© 2020

Keywords

  • Hysterectomy
  • Laparoscopy
  • Meta-analysis
  • Survival
  • Uterine cervical neoplasm

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Laparoscopic versus open radical hysterectomy in women with early stage cervical cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this