Survival of four different radical hysterectomy approaches for
early-stage cervical cancer: a retrospective study
Abstract
Objective This study compares survival of four different surgical
approaches including ARH, LRH, RRH and VRH for early-stage cervical
cancer in order to define the best effects and survivals for patients.
Design Retrospective study. Setting The First Medical Center of the PLA
General Hospital. Population 238 women diagnosed early-stage cervical
cancer between January 2013 and December 2017 and followed up until
September 2020. Methods All patients with early-stage cervical cancer
were retrospective collected in the first medical center of the PLA
general hospital. Disease free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS)
were calculated using Kaplan-Meier’s method, and survival curves were
compared using log-rank test. Main outcome measures Outcomes were the
comparison of patients’ DFS and OS between the four different radical
hysterectomy approaches. Results The intraoperative blood loss and
postoperative exhaust time of LRH, RRH and VRH groups are better than
that in ARH group. The total 5-year OS was significant difference among
the four groups. However, the difference of 5-year DFS was not
statistically significant among the four groups. Furthermore, patients
with early-stage cervical cancer had a significantly better DFS and OS
in ARH and RRH groups than that in LRH and VRH groups. Conclusions This
retrospective study demonstrated that both ARH and RRH obtained higher
rate of 5-year DFS and 5-year OS compared with LRH and VRH for
early-stage cervical cancer, and the survival outcomes between ARH and
RRH were similar. Keywords Cervical cancer, ARH, LRH, RRH, VRH,
survival.