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.