Oncologic Outcomes of Laparoscopic Radical Hysterectomy Using the No-Look No-Touch Technique for Early Stage Cervical Cancer: A Propensity Score-Adjusted Analysis

Improved bladder function in radical hysterectomy without worsening oncologic outcome: resection of the posterior layer of the vesicouterine ligament with the procedure limited to the vesical veins

OBJECTIVE

The classic Okabayashi nerve-sparing radical hysterectomy involves complete resection of the posterior leaf of the vesicouterine ligament, whereas in the simplified nerve-sparing radical hysterectomy, only the vesical veins and some connective tissue of the posterior layer of the vesicouterine ligament are resected. This study aimed to compare bladder function and cervical carcinoma relapse-free survival between these two techniques.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective, historical control study. All female patients aged >20 years who were diagnosed with cervical cancer stage IB1-IIB and underwent radical hysterectomy with pelvic lymphadenectomy between 2009 and 2022 were enrolled. Patients who had a history of other cancers and those who were treated with non-surgical approaches or non-radical hysterectomy were excluded. The primary outcome was relapse-free survival during the follow-up period.

RESULTS

A total of 114 patients who underwent curative-intent radical hysterectomy were included in this study. The median follow-up duration was 60 months. No significant difference was observed in relapse-free survival between the two surgical procedures. The simplified nerve-sparing radical hysterectomy was superior in terms of both motor and sensory bladder function outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Resection of the posterior layer of the vesicouterine ligament, with the procedure limited to the vesical veins, is an effective and safe method for radical hysterectomy. It may be more useful for preserving the bladder function, without leading to unfavorable oncologic outcomes.

Survival after minimally invasive radical hysterectomy with protective colpotomy for early-stage cervical cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Minimally invasive surgery on treatment of early-stage cervical cancer is debatable. Traditional approaches of colpotomy are considered responsible for an inferior oncological outcome. Evidence on whether protective colpotomy could optimize minimally invasive technique and improve prognoses of women with early-stage cervical cancer remains limited. We produced a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare oncological outcomes of the patients treated by minimally invasive radical hysterectomy with protective colpotomy to those treated by open surgery according to existing literature. We explored PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov from inception to December 2022. Inclusion criteria were: (1) randomized controlled trials or observational studies published in English, (2) studies comparing minimally invasive radical hysterectomy with protective colpotomy to abdominal radical hysterectomy in early-stage cervical cancer, and (3) studies comparing survival outcomes. Two reviewers performed the screening, data extraction, and quality assessment independently. A total of 8 retrospective cohort studies with 2020 women were included in the study, 821 of whom were in the minimally invasive surgery group, and 1199 of whom were in the open surgery group. The recurrence-free survival and overall survival in the minimally invasive surgery group were both similar to that in the open surgery group (pooled hazard ratio, 0.88 and 0.78, respectively; 95% confidence interval, 0.56-1.38 and 0.42-1.44, respectively). Minimally invasive radical hysterectomy with protective colpotomy on treatment of early-stage cervical cancer had similar recurrence-free survival and overall survival compared to abdominal radical hysterectomy. Protective colpotomy could be a guaranteed approach to modifying minimally invasive technique.

Clinical practice guidelines for cervical cancer: the Korean Society of Gynecologic Oncology guidelines

This fifth revised version of the Korean Society of Gynecologic Oncology practice guidelines for the management of cervical cancer incorporates recent research findings and changes in treatment strategies based on version 4.0 released in 2020. Each key question was developed by focusing on recent notable insights and crucial contemporary issues in the field of cervical cancer. These questions were evaluated for their significance and impact on the current treatment and were finalized through voting by the development committee. The selected key questions were as follows: the efficacy and safety of immune checkpoint inhibitors as first- or second-line treatment for recurrent or metastatic cervical cancer; the oncologic safety of minimally invasive radical hysterectomy in early stage cervical cancer; the efficacy and safety of adjuvant systemic treatment after concurrent chemoradiotherapy in locally advanced cervical cancer; and the oncologic safety of sentinel lymph node mapping compared to pelvic lymph node dissection. The recommendations, directions, and strengths of this guideline were based on systematic reviews and meta-analyses, and were finally confirmed through public hearings and external reviews. In this study, we describe the revised practice guidelines for the management of cervical cancer.

Clinical implications of the superficial uterine vein pattern for the dissection of the anterior layer of the vesicouterine ligament in radical hysterectomy

OBJECTIVE

To describe anatomic patterns of the superficial uterine vein (sUV) and assess their association with aspects of the dissection procedure of the anterior layer of the vesicouterine ligament (aVUL) by retrospectively reviewing surgical videos.

METHODS

We analyzed patients who underwent laparoscopic radical hysterectomy for early-stage cervical cancer from 2014 to 2019. The primary endpoint was the time required for aVUL dissection. Multiple linear regression analyses were performed to identify factors influencing the time required for aVUL dissection.

RESULTS

Fifty-three Japanese patients were included. Two sUV configurations were observed: type 1 (the vein ran ventral to the ureter along the uterine artery) and type 2 (the vein did not run along the usual ventral course; it ran dorsal to the ureter or was absent). Approximately 30% of the sUVs were type 2. The total time for dissection of both sides of the aVUL was significantly shorter for type 2 sUVs than for type 1 sUVs. The number of hemostatic interventions during dissection of each side of the aVUL was significantly lower for type 2 sUVs than for type 1 sUVs. In the multivariate analysis, the sUV configuration was the factor significantly influencing the duration of aVUL dissection on each side (right side: β=-143.4; left side, β=-160.4).

CONCLUSION

We demonstrated that the sUV had 2 types of courses, ventral and others, and its course affected the time required for dissection and the number of hemostatic interventions. Our results provide information supportive of improved radical hysterectomy outcomes.

Comparison of the survival outcomes of laparoscopic, abdominal and gasless laparoscopic radical hysterectomy for early-stage cervical cancer: trial protocol of a multicenter randomized controlled trial (LAGCC trial)

Background

Radical hysterectomy (RH) is considered a cornerstone in the treatment of early-stage cervical cancer. However, the debate surrounding the optimal surgical approach, whether minimally invasive or open surgery, remains controversial. The objective of this trial is to evaluate the survival outcomes of cervical cancer patients who undergo different surgical approaches.

Methods

This study is designed as a prospective, multicenter, open, parallel, and randomized controlled trial. A total of 500 patients diagnosed with stage IA1 with LVSI, IA2, IB1, or IB2 (2018 FIGO) will be recruited. Recruitment of participants started in November 2020. The participants will be randomly assigned to one of three groups: conventional laparoscopic RH, gasless laparoscopic RH, or abdominal RH. The primary endpoint of this trial is the 2-year disease-free survival (DFS) rate. The secondary endpoints will include the 2-year overall survival (OS) rate, 5-year DFS/OS, recurrence rates, operation time, intraoperative blood loss, surgery-related complications, and impact on quality of life (QoL).

Discussion

We expect this trial to provide compelling and high-quality evidence to guide the selection of the most appropriate surgical approach for early-stage cervical cancer.

Clinical trial registration

Chinese Clinical Trial Register, identifier ChiCTR2000035515.

An optimized robotic surgical technique for cervical cancer: investigating whether the use of the pulling robotic arm has better surgical outcomes

Objective

The evidence for adopting the 3^rd robotic arm (RA) called the pulling RA rather than a uterine manipulator to manipulate the uterus in the robotic radical hysterectomy (RRH) for cervical cancer is still limited. We present a single-center retrospective experience comparing using the pulling RA to replace a uterine manipulator vs. using a uterine manipulator to manipulate the uterus in RRH.

Methods

106 patients diagnosed with IA, IB1-IB2 and IIA1 cervical cancer were retrospectively included for intraoperative and postoperative parameters analysis. 50 patients received RRH by adopting the pulling RA instead of a uterine manipulator to pull the uterus (3-RA RRH group), and another 56 patients were performed RRH with a uterine manipulator (2-RA RRH group). RRH with the pulling RA consisted of a camera arm, 3 RAs including a pulling RA, and 2 conventional assistant arms (3-RA RRH group). In comparison, RRH with a uterine manipulator included 2 RAs and 2 conventional assistant arms (2-RA RRH group). Besides, 3-RA' RRH group was selected from the 25^th-50^th cases in the 3-RA RRH group based on the learning curve and was compared with the 2-RA RRH group in terms of intraoperative and postoperative parameters.

Results

The patients' early post-operative complication (≤7 days) (p=0.022) and post-operative anemia (p < 0.001) of the 3-RA RRH were significantly lower than that in the 2-RA RRH group. The results of comparing the 2-RA RRH group with the 3-RA' RRH group were consistent with the aforementioned results, except for the operative time (220.4 vs. 197.4 minutes, p=0.022) and hospital stay (7.8 vs. 8.7 days, p=0.034). The median follow-up in the 3-RA RRH and 2-RA RRH groups was 29 and 50 months till March 2023. The 3-RA RRH and 2-RA RRH groups' recurrence rates were 2% (1/50) and 5.4% (3/56), respectively. The mortality in the 3-RA RRH and 2-RA RRH groups was 2% (1/50) and 3.5% (2/56), respectively.

Conclusion

Our study suggested that replacing the uterine manipulator via the 3^rd RA is viable; the results showed comparable surgical outcomes between the two methods. Thus, 3-RA RRH could be considered a well-executed surgical option in well-selected patients.

Intracorporeal colpotomy using the Gutclamper as a novel clamping device to prevent tumor spillage during laparoscopic radical hysterectomy for cervical cancer

INTRODUCTION

Tumor cell spillage during the colpotomy has been suspected as one reason for poor oncologic outcomes in laparoscopic radical hysterectomy (LRH) for cervical cancer. To prevent such tumor spillage in LRH, we focused on use of a Gutclamper which is a device originally designed to clamp the colon and rectum during colorectal resections.

MATERIALS AND SURGICAL TECHNIQUE

A woman with stage IB1 cervical cancer underwent LRH using the Gutclamper. The Gutclamper was inserted into the abdominal cavity via 5-mm trocar, the vagina was clamped, and an intracorporeal colpotomy was performed caudal to this device.

DISCUSSION

The Gutclamper can be used to clamp the vaginal canal and avoid the exposure of cervical tumor, regardless of the surgeon's skills or patient conditions. An intracorporeal colpotomy using the Gutclamper can contribute to the standardization of LRH.

Survival outcomes of laparoscopic versus open radical hysterectomy in early cervical cancer with incidentally identified high-risk factors

OBJECTIVE

Previously, we suggested that patients with cervical cancer (CC) with tumors ≤2 cm on preoperative magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) are safe candidates for laparoscopic radical hysterectomy (LRH). Here, we aim to investigate whether LRH deteriorates the prognosis of patients with incidentally identified high-risk factors; lymph node metastasis (LNM) or parametrial invasion (PMI).

METHODS

We identified patients with 2009 FIGO stage IB1 CC who underwent Type C LRH or open radical hysterectomy (ORH) at three tertiary hospitals between 2000 and 2019. Those with a tumor ≤2 cm on preoperative MRI who were not suspicious of LNM or PMI preoperatively were included, while those who were indicated to receive adjuvant treatment but did not actually receive it were excluded. Survival outcomes were compared between the LRH and ORH groups in the overall population, then narrowed down to those with LNM, and then to those with PMI.

RESULTS

In total, 498 patients were included: 299 in the LRH group and 199 in the ORH group. The LRH and ORH groups showed similar 3-year progression-free survival (PFS) (94.0% vs. 93.6%; P = 0.615) and 5-year overall survival (OS) rates (97.2% vs. 96.8%; P = 0.439). On pathologic examination, 49 (9.8%) and 16 (3.2%) patients had LNM and PMI, respectively, and 10 (2.0%) had both. In the LNM subgroup, 5-year PFS rate was not significantly different between the LRH and ORH groups (73.2% vs. 91.7%; P = 0.169). In the PMI subgroup, no difference in PFS was observed between the two groups (P = 0.893).

CONCLUSIONS

LRH might not deteriorate recurrence and mortality rates in CC patients with tumors ≤2 cm when adjuvant treatment is appropriately administered, even if pathologic LNM and PMI are incidentally identified.

Comparison of the Survival Outcomes of Minimally Invasive Surgery with Open Surgery in Patients with Uterine-Confined and Node-Negative Cervical Cancer: A Population-Based Study

We aimed to compare the oncological outcomes between Japanese women with uterine-confined and node-negative cervical cancer who underwent open surgery and those who underwent minimally invasive surgery (MIS). A population-based retrospective cohort study was conducted using data from the Osaka Cancer Registry that ranged from 2011 to 2018. A total of 2279 patients who underwent surgical treatment for uterine-confined and node-negative cervical cancer were identified. The patients were classified into groups according to surgery type (open and MIS groups) and year of diagnosis (group one, 2011-2014; group two, 2015-2018). The oncologic outcomes were compared between the MIS and open groups. When the MIS group (n = 225) was compared with open group (n = 2054), overall, there was no significant between-group difference in terms of overall survival. Based on Kaplan-Meier estimates, the probability of overall survival at four years was 99.5% in the MIS group and 97.2% in the open group (p = 0.1110). When examined according to the year of diagnosis, there were no significant between-group differences in the overall survival in both groups one and two. In this population-based cohort study, MIS did not compromise survival outcomes when compared with conventional open surgery in Japanese patients with uterine-confined and node-negative (FIGO 2018 stage I) cervical cancer.

Challenges in the Diagnosis and Individualized Treatment of Cervical Cancer

Cervical cancer is still the fourth most common cancer in women throughout the world; an estimated 604,000 new cases were observed in 2020. Better knowledge of its pathogenesis, gained in recent years, has introduced new preventive and diagnostic approaches. Knowledge of its pathogenesis has made it possible to provide individualized surgical and drug treatment. In industrialized countries, cervical cancer has become a less frequent tumor entity due to the accessibility of the human papilloma virus vaccination, systematic preventive programs/early detection programs, health care infrastructure and the availability of effective therapy options. Nevertheless, globally, neither mortality nor morbidity has been significantly reduced over the past 10 years, and therapy approaches differ widely. The aim of this review is to address recent advances in the prevention, diagnostic investigation and treatment of cervical cancer globally, focusing on advances in Germany, with a view toward providing an updated overview for clinicians. The following aspects are addressed in detail: (a) the prevalence and causes of cervical cancer, (b) diagnostic tools using imaging techniques, cytology and pathology, (c) pathomechanisms and clinical symptoms of cervical cancer and (d) different treatment approaches (pharmacological, surgical and others) and their impact on outcomes.

Special Issue: "Management of Early Stage Cervical Cancer"

Cervical carcinoma is a common gynecological malignancy that remains a challenge for oncologic gynecologists around the world [...].

Minimally invasive radical hysterectomy and the importance of avoiding cancer cell spillage for early-stage cervical cancer: a narrative review

Radical hysterectomy is a standard surgery to treat early-stage uterine cervical cancer. The Laparoscopic Approach to Cervical Cancer (LACC) trial has shown that patients receiving minimally invasive radical hysterectomy have a poorer prognosis than those receiving open radical hysterectomy; however, the reason for this remains unclear. The LACC trial had 2 concerns: the learning curve and the procedural effects. Appropriate management of the learning curve effect, including surgeons' skills, is required to correctly interpret the result of surgical randomized controlled trials. Whether the LACC trial managed the learning curve effect remains controversial, based on the surgeons' inclusion criteria and the distribution of institutions with recurrent cases. An appropriate surgical procedure is also needed, and avoiding intraoperative cancer cell spillage plays an important role during cancer surgery. Cancer cell spillage during minimally invasive surgery to treat cervical cancer is caused by several factors, including 1) exposure of tumor, 2) the use of a uterine manipulator, and 3) direct handling of the uterine cervix. Unfortunately, these issues were not addressed by the LACC trial. We evaluated the results of minimally invasive radical hysterectomy while avoiding cancer cell spillage for early-stage cervical cancer. Our findings show that avoiding cancer cell spillage during minimally invasive radical hysterectomy may ensure an equivalent oncologic outcome, comparable to that of open radical hysterectomy. Therefore, evaluating the importance of avoiding cancer cell spillage during minimally invasive surgery with a better control of the learning curve and procedural effects is needed.

Transvaginal cervical tumor-concealing no-look no-touch technique in minimally invasive radical hysterectomy for early-stage cervical cancer: a novel operation technique

The Laparoscopic Approach to Cervical Cancer (LACC) trial demonstrated that minimally invasive radical hysterectomy was inferior to the open approach [1]; this unexpected result could be attributed to the spillage of cancer cells [2]. Following the LACC trial, laparoscopic radical hysterectomy without an intrauterine manipulator upon completion of a vaginal cuff closure became the new standard treatment method [3]. However, the lack of intrauterine manipulator results in poor visualization and inadequate paracervical tissue resection. This study describes the no-look no-touch technique to address this difficulty. The core procedures in our no-look, no-touch laparoscopic radical hysterectomy are: (Step 1) Creation and closure of a vaginal cuff; (Step 2) Manipulation of the uterus without an intra-uterine manipulator; and (Step 3) Exposure of the paracervical tissues by the suspension technique. The patient eligibility for our procedure is as follows: 1) previously untreated cervical cancer (those who underwent diagnostic conization could be included); 2) clinical stage IA2, IB1, IB2, and IIA1 based on the 2018 International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics staging system; 3) histologically confirmed cervical cancer, including squamous cell carcinoma, adenocarcinoma, and adenosquamous carcinoma. The important indication for this procedure is in cases where the tumor is less than 4 cm in diameter. We previously reported that our no-look no-touch technique enables smooth performance of laparoscopic radical hysterectomy without worsening oncologic outcomes [4]. According to a recent systematic review and meta-analysis [5], minimally invasive radical hysterectomy with vaginal cuff closure is a safe treatment option; however, it involves a steep learning curve, which has impeded its increased application. This video will hopefully make minimally invasive radical hysterectomy with protective maneuvers against cancer cell spillage more accessible. Based on our experiences, we propose that our transvaginal cervical tumor-concealing no-look no-touch technique will mitigate the risk of surgical spill of tumor cells during minimally invasive radical hysterectomy. The informed consent for use of this video was taken from the patient.

Laparo-assisted vaginal radical hysterectomy as a safe option for minimal invasive surgery in early stage cervical cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Radical hysterectomy and pelvic lymphadenectomy are considered the standard treatment for early-stage cervical cancer (ECC). Minimal Invasive approach to this surgery has been debated after the publication of a recent prospective randomized trial (Laparoscopic Approach to Cervical Cancer, LACC trial). It demonstrated poorer oncological outcomes for Minimal Invasive Surgery in ECC. However, the reasons are still an open debate. Laparo-Assisted Vaginal Hysterectomy (LAVRH) seems to be a logical option to Abdominal Radical Hysterectomy (ARH). This meta-analysis has the aim to prove it.

METHODS

Following the recommendations in the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement, the Pubmed database and Scopus database were systematically searched in January 2022 since early first publications. No limitation of the country was made. Only English article were considered. The studies containing data about Disease-free Survival (DFS) and/or Overall Survival (OS) and/or Recurrence Rate (RcR) were included.

RESULTS

18 studies fulfilled inclusion criteria. 8 comparative studies were enrolled in meta-analysis. Patients were analyzed concerning surgical approach (Laparo-Assisted Vaginal Radical Hysterectomy) and compared with ARH Oncological outcomes such as DFS and OS were considered. 3033 patiets were included. Meta-analysis highlighted a non-statistic significant difference between LARVH and ARH (RR 0.82 [95% CI 0.55-1.23] p = 0.34; I2 = 0%; p = 0.96). OS was feasible only for 3 studies (RR 1.14 [95% CI 0.28-4.67] p = 0.43; I2 = 0 p = 0.86). Data about the type of recurrences (loco-regional vs distant) were collected.

CONCLUSION

LARVH does not appear to affect DFS and OS in ECC patients. The proposed results seem to be comparable with the open approach group of the LACC trial, which today represents the reference standard for the treatment of this pathology. More studies will be needed to test the safety and efficacy of LARVH in the ECC.

Laparo-assisted vaginal radical hysterectomy as a safe option for Minimal Invasive Surgery in early stage cervical cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Radical hysterectomy and pelvic lymphadenectomy are considered the standard treatment for early-stage cervical cancer (ECC). Minimal Invasive approach to this surgery has been debated after the publication of a recent prospective randomized trial (Laparoscopic Approach to Cervical Cancer, LACC trial). It demonstrated poorer oncological outcomes for Minimal Invasive Surgery in ECC. However, the reasons are still an open debate. Laparo-Assisted Vaginal Hysterectomy (LAVRH) seems to be a logical option to Abdominal Radical Hysterectomy (ARH). This meta-analysis has the aim to prove it.

METHODS

Following the recommendations in the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement, the Pubmed database and Scopus database were systematically searched in January 2022 since early first publications. No limitation of the country was made. Only English article were considered. The studies containing data about Disease-free Survival (DFS) and/or Overall Survival (OS) and/or Recurrence Rate (RcR) were included.

RESULTS

19 studies fulfilled inclusion criteria. 9 comparative studies were enrolled in meta-analysis. Patients were analyzed concerning surgical approach (Laparo-Assisted Vaginal Radical Hysterectomy) and compared with ARH Oncological outcomes such as DFS and OS were considered. 3196 patiets were included for the review. Meta-analysis of 1988 0f them highlighted a non-statistic significant difference between LARVH and ARH (RR 0.8 [95% CI 0.55-1.16] p = 0.24; I² = 0%; p = 0.98). OS was feasible only for 4 studies (RR 0.84 [95% CI 0.23-3.02] p = 0.79; I² = 0 p = 0.44). Sub-analysis for tumor with a maximum diameter greater than 2 cm was performed. Data about the type of recurrences (loco-regional vs distant) were collected.

CONCLUSION

LARVH does not appear to affect DFS and OS in ECC patients. The proposed results seem to be comparable with the open approach group of the LACC trial, which today represents the reference standard for the treatment of this pathology. More studies will be needed to test the safety and efficacy of LARVH in the ECC.