首页> 外文期刊>European Journal of Surgical Oncology: The Journal of the European Society of Surgical Oncology and the British Association of Surgical Oncology >Minilaparoscopic radical hysterectomy for cervical cancer: Multi-institutional experience in comparison with conventional laparoscopy
【24h】

Minilaparoscopic radical hysterectomy for cervical cancer: Multi-institutional experience in comparison with conventional laparoscopy

机译:微型腹腔镜宫颈癌全子宫切除术:与常规腹腔镜检查相比的多机构经验

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
获取外文期刊封面目录资料

摘要

Objective To analyze the preliminary experience of three gynecologic oncology services with minilaparoscopic radical hysterectomy (mLRH) for the treatment of cervical cancer and to compare perioperative outcomes with those of conventional laparoscopic surgery (LRH). Methods Prospectively collected data on consecutive cervical cancer patients undergoing radical hysterectomy with a laparoscopic approach were analyzed retrospectively. Perioperative outcomes of women undergoing mLRH were compared to data from control patients who had undergone LRH with 5-mm instruments. Adjustment for potential selection bias in surgical approach was made with propensity score (PS) matching. Results The study cohort consisted of 257 patients, 35 undergoing mLRH and 222 undergoing LRH. The two groups were comparable in terms of demographic and tumor characteristics. No significant differences were observed between groups in terms of operative time, blood loss, lymph node yield, amount of parametrial or vaginal cuff tissue removed, and percentage of intra- or postoperative complications, both in the entire cohort and in the PS matched group. No conversions were needed from mLRH to standard laparoscopy or from minilaparoscopy to open surgery. Conversion from standard laparoscopy to open surgery was necessary in 2 patients. A shorter hospital stay was observed among women who had mLRH than in those undergoing LRH [2 (1-10) vs 4 (1-14) days, p = 0.005]. This difference remained significant after PS matching. Conclusion Our preliminary study suggests that in experienced hands minilaparoscopy is a feasible and safe technique for radical hysterectomy and yields results that are equivalent to those of LRH.
机译:目的分析三种妇科肿瘤学配合微型腹腔镜根治性子宫切除术(mLRH)治疗宫颈癌的初步经验,并将其围手术期结果与常规腹腔镜手术(LRH)进行比较。方法回顾性分析连续腹腔镜行宫颈全子宫切除术的宫颈癌患者的资料。将接受mLRH的妇女的围手术期结局与使用5-mm器械接受LRH的对照患者的数据进行比较。通过倾向评分(PS)匹配对手术方法中的潜在选择偏倚进行调整。结果研究队列包括257例患者,其中35例接受mLRH和222例接受LRH。两组在人口统计学和肿瘤特征方面具有可比性。在整个队列和PS匹配组中,在手术时间,失血量,淋巴结产量,切除的子宫旁或阴道套囊组织的量以及术中或术后并发症的百分比方面,各组之间均未观察到显着差异。从mLRH到标准腹腔镜检查或从微型腹腔镜检查到开腹手术都不需要转换。有2例患者需要从标准腹腔镜手术转变为开腹手术。接受mLRHRH治疗的女性比接受LRH治疗的女性住院时间短[2(1-10)天与4(1-14)天,p = 0.005]。 PS匹配后,这种差异仍然很明显。结论我们的初步研究表明,在经验丰富的手中进行微型腹腔镜检查是行根治性子宫切除术的可行且安全的技术,其结果与LRH相当。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号