4.5 Article

Use of Abdominal Radical Trachelectomy to Treat Cervical Cancer Greater Than 2 cm in Diameter

期刊

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF GYNECOLOGICAL CANCER
卷 23, 期 6, 页码 1065-1070

出版社

BMJ PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1097/IGC.0b013e318295fb41

关键词

Early-stage cervical cancer; Radical hysterectomy; Abdominal radical trachelectomy; 2-cm diameter

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: Invasive cervical cancer is one of the most common cancers, with 500,000 new cases diagnosed annually. Fertility preservation has become an important component of the overall quality of life of many cancer survivors. Expert opinion has suggested that fertility-sparing surgery should be limited to those patients diagnosed with cervical cancer less than 2 cm in diameter. Our objective was to report our abdominal radical trachelectomy (ART) experience in the opposite group of patients-those with a cervical cancer more than 2 cm in diameter. Methods: Between 1999 and 2006, a total of 45 patients with cervical carcinoma at International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics stage IB1-IB2 measuring more than 2 cm in diameter underwent fertility-sparing ART and pelvic lymphadenectomy at the 3 institutions where the authors are based (Budapest, Hungary; London, United Kingdom; New York, United States). They were followed up for more than 5 years. Results: For 69% of patients (n = 31), completed ART was considered to have been curative, and no adjuvant treatment was advised. Of those patients, 93.5% (n = 29) were alive at the time of follow-up. Thirty-one percent of patients (n = 14) underwent immediate completion of radical hysterectomy. Three of 8 patients who wished to fall pregnant delivered healthy neonates. Conclusions: The 5-year survival rate (93.5%) for this case series is equal (or better) to rates reported in the literature for patient treated with radical hysterectomy. Our survival data seem to support the hypothesis that ART is a safe treatment option for patients with invasive cervical cancer lesions of more than 2 cm.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据