Impact of laparoscopic radical hysterectomy on survival outcome in patients with FIGO stage IB cervical cancer: A matching study of two institutional hospitals in Korea

• Published in: Gynecologic oncology 2019-10, Vol.155 (1), p.75-82
• Main Authors: Kim, Se Ik, Lee, Maria, Lee, Sungyoung, Suh, Dong Hoon, Kim, Hee Seung, Kim, Kidong, Chung, Hyun Hoon, No, Jae Hong, Kim, Jae-Weon, Park, Noh Hyun, Song, Yong-Sang, Kim, Yong Beom
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Cervical cancer; Laparoscopic surgery; Matching; Radical hysterectomy; Recurrence; Survival
• ISSN: 0090-8258; 1095-6859
• DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2019.07.019

To compare survival outcomes of primary laparoscopic radical hysterectomy (LRH) and open radical hysterectomy (ORH) in patients with FIGO stage IB cervical cancer. We retrospectively identified stage IB1–IB2 cervical cancer patients who received either LRH (n = 343) or ORH (n = 222) at two tertiary institutional hospitals between 2000 and 2018. To adjust for confounders, we conducted Mahalanobis distance-based sample matching for stage, histology, cervical mass size, parametrial invasion, and lymph node metastasis. Then, survival outcomes were compared between the matched groups. Through the independent matching processes, we narrowed the study population to stage IB1 patients and stage IB1 patients with tumor size ≤2 cm on pre-operative MRI. After matching, LRH group showed poorer progression-free survival (PFS) than ORH group (3-year: 85.4% vs. 91.8%; P = 0.036), whereas no significant difference in overall survival (OS) was found. Regarding recurrence patterns, no significant differences in the incidences of pelvic, retroperitoneal lymph node and abdominal recurrences, or distant metastasis were observed between the two groups. Among the matched patients with stage IB1 who had cervical mass size ≤2 cm, the LRH and ORH groups showed similar PFS (3-year: 90.0% vs. 93.1%; P = 0.8) and OS (5-year: 98.6% vs. 96.4%; P = 0.6). Despite the retrospective design, our matched cohort study suggests that ORH might be preferable for the surgical treatment of FIGO stage IB cervical cancer. However, in stage IB1 patients with tumor size ≤2 cm, LRH might be applicable, as equivalent outcomes were found regardless of the surgical approach. Further prospective studies are warranted. •We conducted a matching study to investigate survival of laparoscopic radical hysterectomy (LRH) in stage IB cervical cancer.•After matching, LRH group showed a higher recurrence rate compared to open group, whereas overall survival was not different.•In stage IB1 patients with tumor size ≤2 cm, equivalent survival outcomes were observed regardless of the surgical approach.