Introduction
Cervical cancer remains a significant health concern, being the fourth leading cause of cancer-related deaths worldwide. Early diagnosis and intervention can lead to a cure, with radical hysterectomy (RH) and bilateral pelvic lymph node dissection being the first-line treatment for early-stage cervical cancer. The debate over the advantages and disadvantages of laparoscopic RH continues, especially after the Laparoscopic Approach to Carcinoma of Cervix (LACC) trial raised concerns about the oncologic safety of minimally invasive surgery.
Study Findings
This propensity-matched retrospective observational analysis focused on cervical cancer patients with lesions less than 2 cm, assessing the oncologic outcomes between laparoscopic RH and open surgery. The study found that LRH was associated with a higher risk of recurrence compared to open surgery, although there was no significant difference in overall survival (OS) between the two groups. Factors such as histology subtype, positive pelvic lymph node, and the laparoscopic operation procedure were identified as potentially predictive of disease-free survival (DFS).
Discussion
The study acknowledges the undeniable advantages of minimally invasive surgery, including less intraoperative blood loss, shorter hospital stays, and faster recovery. However, it also points out the limitations of the LACC trial and the ongoing controversy over the best surgical approach for tumors less than 2 cm in diameter. The research highlights the importance of preoperative imaging in clinical practice and the challenges in accurately predicting tumor size and stage before surgery.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the study suggests that cervical cancer patients with lesions less than 2 cm may have a higher risk of recurrence when undergoing LRH compared to open surgery. The findings underscore the need for further randomized controlled trials to explore the advantages and disadvantages of minimally invasive techniques in treating early-stage cervical cancer.
