4.5 Article

Abdominal Radical Trachelectomy in Fertility-Sparing Treatment of Early-Stage Cervical Cancer

Journal

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF GYNECOLOGICAL CANCER
Volume 19, Issue 8, Pages 1407-1411

Publisher

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1111/IGC.0b013e3181b9549a

Keywords

Abdominal radical trachelectomy; Cervical cancer; Fertility-sparing procedure

Funding

  1. Ministry of Health of the Czech Republic [NS 10037-3]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: Abdominal radical trachelectomy (ART) is one of the fertility-sparing procedures in women with early-stage cervical cancer. In comparison with vaginal radical trachelectomy, the published results of ART are so far limited. Methods: Enrolled were women referred for ART either by laparoscopy or laparotomy. The main inclusion criterion was stage IA2 or IB1 with a cranial extent that allows for preservation of at least 1 cm of the endocervical canal. Results: A total of 24 women were referred for the procedure, but fertility could not be preserved in 7 (29%) of them. Four women underwent immediate completion of radical hysterectomy because of a positive cranial surgical margin (n = 2) or sentinel node macrometastasis (n = 2) oil frozen section. We found no correlation between tumor volume and inability to preserve fertility. A positive sentinel node was identified in 4 patients (17%); there were no false-negative results. Of the 9 women (53%) who have tried to conceive so far, 6 (67%) have conceived and 5 given birth, 2 of which were premature deliveries. Conclusions: Fertility cannot be preserved because of positive cranial margins or involved lymph nodes in almost one third of patients originally referred for radical trachelectomy. The main criterion for the selection of suitable patients should be the cranial extent of the tumor. Abdominal radical trachelectomy allows for achievement of satisfactory obstetrical Outcomes.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available