Page 28 - World Journal of Laparoscopic Surgery

Laparoscopic Radical Hysterectomy versus Open Radical Hysterectomy for Carcinoma Cervix Stage 1

Table 2: Complication rate laparoscopic versus open radical hysterectomy
Bladder Ureteric Hypercarbia Postoperative Urinary Other post- Two years disease
injuries injury fever/abscess/ fistula operative free survival
infection complications rate(%)
Ref1 – – – 1 – 1 100
Ref2 7 1 – 9 – 5 94
Ref2 – – – 5 – 2 94
Ref3 3 – – – 1 – 94.9
Ref4 3 – – – – – –
Ref5 – 1 – – 1 – –
Ref6 3 1 – – – – –
Ref7 – – – – – – –
Ref8 – – – – – – –
Ref9 – – – – – – –
Ref10 2 1 – – – 4 97
Ref11 – – – – – – –
Ref12 – – – – – – –
Ref12 – – – – – – –
Ref 13 – – – – – 8 83
Ref 14 – – – 22 – – –
Ref 15 5 – 1 – 10 6 –
Ref 16 5 1 1 – 12 19 83.7
Ref 17 – – – – – 40% 75.5
Ref 18 – – – – – – 83
Ref19 – 3 – 8 – 3 83
Ref 20 2 – – 30% 3.5% 4% –

comparable outcome except that it takes more operative time with aortic and pelvic lymphadenectomy in patients with stage
and chances of intraoperative major complications are higher. I cervical cancer: Surgical morbidity and intermediate follow-up
It requires extraordinary surgical skills. The laparoscopic Aug 2002;187(2):340-48.
modality gives better performance of lymphadenectomy and 4. Spirtos NM, Schlaerth JB, Kimball RE, Leiphart VM, Ballon
hence yields marginally better disease free survival. SC. Am J Obstet Gynecol. Laparoscopic radical hysterectomy
(type III) with aortic and pelvic lymphadenectomy. Jun
1996;174(6):1763-67; discussion 1767-68.
CONCLUSION 5. Sedlacek TV, Campion MJ, Hutchins RA, Reich H.J Am Assoc
At present the laparoscopic approach for cervical cancer stage Gynecol Laparosc. Laparoscopic Radical Hysterectomy: A
1 is though not better but fairly comparable to conventional Preliminary Report Aug 1994;1(4, Part 2):S32.
modality. The advent of robotic and with growing skill of 6. Schneider A, Possover M, Kamprath S, Endisch U, Krause N,
Nöschel H. Obstet Gynecol. Laparoscopy-assisted radical vaginal
surgeons this modality will bring about better results with fewer hysterectomy modified according to Schauta-Stoeckel Dec
complications. 1996;88(6):1057-60.
7. Querleu D. Gynecol Oncol. Laparoscopically assisted radical
REFERENCES vaginal hysterectomy Nov 1993;51(2):248-54.
8. Possover M, Krause N, Plaul K, Kühne-Heid R, Schneider A.
1. Nezhat CR, Nezhat FR, Burrell MO, Ramirez CE, Welander C,
et al. Gynecol Surg. Laparoscopic radical hysterectomy and Gynecol Oncol. Laparoscopic para-aortic and pelvic
laparoscopically assisted vaginal radical hysterectomy with lymphadenectomy: Experience with 150 patients and review of
pelvic and para-aortic node dissection Summer 1993;9(2):105- the literature Oct 1998;71(1):19-28.
20. 9. Massi G, Savino L, Susini T. Am J Obstet Gynecol. Three
2. Steed H, Rosen B, Murphy J, Laframboise S, De Petrillo D, classes of radical vaginal hysterectomy for treatment of
et al. Gynecol Oncol. A comparison of laparascopic-assisted endometrial and cervical cancer Dec 1996;175(6):1576-85.
radical vaginal hysterectomy and radical abdominal hysterectomy 10. Zhonghua Fu Chan Ke Za Zhi. Clinical evaluation of laparoscopic
in the treatment of cervical cancer Jun 2004;93(3):588-93. radical hysterectomy with pelvic and para-aortic
3. Spirtos NM, Eisenkop SM, Schlaerth JB, Ballon SC. Am J lymphadenectomy in patients with cervical cancer Jul
Obstet Gynecol. Laparoscopic radical hysterectomy (type III) 2003;38(7):409-11.

World Journal of Laparoscopic Surgery, September-December 2009;2(3):23-28 27