4.5 Article

Self-Reported Sexual, Bowel and Bladder Function in Cervical Cancer Patients Following Different Treatment Modalities Longitudinal Prospective Cohort Study

期刊

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF GYNECOLOGICAL CANCER
卷 23, 期 9, 页码 1717-1725

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/IGC.0b013e3182a80a65

关键词

Cervical cancer; Morbidity; Radical hysterectomy; Nerve-sparing

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: Conventional radical hysterectomy with pelvic lymphadenectomy (RHL) for early-stage cervical cancer is associated with significant bladder, anorectal, and sexual dysfunction. Nerve-sparing modification of RHL (NS-RHL) has been developed with the aim to reduce surgical treatment-related morbidity. Postoperative radiation therapy (RT) is offered to patients with unfavorable prognostic features to improve local control. The aim of the study was to assess self-reported morbidity of various types of treatment in cervical cancer patients. Methods: Self-reported symptoms were prospectively assessed before and 1 and 2 years after treatment by the Dutch Gynaecologic Leiden Questionnaire. Results: Included were 229 women (123 NS-RHL and 106 conventional RHL). Ninety-four (41%) received RT. Up to 2 years (response rate, 81%), women reported significantly more bowel, bladder, and sexual symptoms compared with the pretreatment situation. No significant difference was found between the conventional RHL and NS-RHL with the exception of the unexpected finding that a smaller percentage in the NS-RHL group (34% vs 68%) complained about numbness of the labia and/or thigh. Radiation therapy had a negative impact on diarrhea, urine incontinence, lymphedema, and sexual symptoms (especially a narrow/short vagina). Conclusions: In the current longitudinal cohort study, treatment for early-stage cervical cancer was associated with worse subjective bladder, anorectal, and sexual functioning, irrespective of the surgical procedure used. Postoperative RT resulted in a significant deterioration of these functions. The results have to be interpreted with caution in view of the study design and method used.

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