ABSTRACT
PURPOSE: To analyze the survival outcomes of patients in a Brazilian cohort who underwent minimally invasive surgery (MIS) compared with open surgery for early stage cervical cancer. METHODS: A multicenter database was constructed, registering 1280 cervical cancer patients who had undergone radical hysterectomy from 2000 to 2019. For the final analysis, we included cases with a tumor ≤ 4 cm (stages Ia2 to Ib2, FIGO 2018) that underwent surgery from January 2007 to December 2017. Propensity score matching was also performed. RESULTS: A total of 776 cases were ultimately analyzed, 526 of which were included in the propensity score matching analysis (open, n = 263; MIS, n = 263). There were 52 recurrences (9.9%), 28 (10.6%) with MIS and 24 (9.1%) with open surgery (p = 0.55); and 34 deaths were recorded, 13 (4.9%) and 21 (8.0%), respectively (p = 0.15). We noted a 3-year disease-free survival (DFS) rate of 88.2% and 90.3% for those who received MIS and open surgery, respectively (HR 1.32; 95% CI: 0.76-2.29; p = 0.31) and a 5-year overall survival (OS) rate of 91.8% and 91.1%, respectively (HR 0.80; 95% CI: 0.40-1.61; p = 0.53). There was no difference in 3-year DFS rates between open surgery and MIS for tumors ≤ 2 cm (95.7% vs. 90.8%; p = 0.16) or > 2 cm (83.9% vs. 85.4%; p = 0.77). Also, the 5-year OS between open surgery and MIS did not differ for tumors ≤ 2 cm (93.1% vs. 93.6%; p = 0.82) or > 2 cm (88.9% vs. 89.8%; p = 0.35). CONCLUSIONS: Survival outcomes were similar between minimally invasive and open radical hysterectomy in this large retrospective multicenter cohort.
Subject(s)
Laparoscopy , Uterine Cervical Neoplasms , Disease-Free Survival , Female , Humans , Hysterectomy , Minimally Invasive Surgical Procedures , Neoplasm Staging , Retrospective Studies , Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/pathology , Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/surgeryABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: Cancers of the vulva account for 3% to 5% of all cancers of the female genital. This study was conducted to evaluate clinical, pathological, and molecular prognostic factors in patients with cancer of the vulva. METHODS: Patients with squamous cell carcinoma of the vulva who had undergone surgical treatment at the Department of Pelvic Surgery and Gynecology Service, Aristides Maltez Hospital, between June 1993 and June 2011 were selected. Clinical, epidemiological, pathological, and molecular characteristics related to the prognosis of these patients were evaluated in relation to the prognosis. In the molecular evaluation, we studied the expression of p53 and matrix metalloproteinase 2 by immunohistochemistry. RESULTS: Seventy-five patients were eligible for the study. In multivariable analysis, factors related to survival were as follows: tumor size larger than 4 cm (P = 0.014), an invasion depth greater than 2 mm (P = 0.023) and matrix metalloproteinase 2 expression in more than 50% of the tumor cells (P = 0.046). With the use of the relative risks of the factors identified in the multivariable analysis, a point count was developed for a prognostic classification (the score classifies patients into 3 categories). CONCLUSIONS: A tumor size larger than 4 cm, an invasion depth greater than 2 mm, and metalloproteinase 2 expression in more than 50% of the tumor cells seem to be related to lower overall survival rate in patients with cancer of the vulva undergoing surgical treatment. A classification of the patient's prognosis can be performed using a point count based on these relative risks.
