A case-controlled study of total laparoscopic radical hysterectomy with pelvic lymphadenectomy versus radical abdominal hysterectomy in a fellowship training program

Abstract

To determine whether total laparoscopic radical hysterectomy (TLRH) is a feasible alternative to an abdominal radical hysterectomy (ARH) in a gynecologic oncology fellowship training program. We prospectively collected cases of all of the patients with cervical cancer treated with TLRH and pelvic lymphadenectomy by our division from 2000 to 2006. All of the patients from the TLRH group were matched 1:1 with the patients who had ARH during the same period based on stage, age, histological subtype, and nodal status. Thirty patients were treated with TLRH with a mean age of 48.3 years (range, 29–78 years). The mean pelvic lymph node count was 31 (range, 10–61) in the TLRH group versus 21.8 (range, 8–42) (P < 0.01) in the ARH group. Mean estimated blood loss was 200 cc (range, 100–600 cc) in the TLRH with no transfusions compared to 520 cc in the ARH group (P < 0.01), in which five patients required transfusions. Mean operating time was 318.5 min (range, 200–464 min) compared to 242.5 min in the ARH group (P < 0.01), and mean hospital stay was 3.8 days (range, 2–11 days) compared to 5.6 days in the ARH group (P < 0.01). All TLRH cases were completed laparoscopically. All patients in the TLRH group are disease free at the time of this report. In conclusion, it is feasible to incorporate TLRH training into the surgical curriculum of gynecologic oncology fellows without increasing perioperative morbidity. Standardization of TLRH technique and consistent guidance by experienced faculty is imperative.