Comparison of survival and perioperative outcomes following simple and radical hysterectomy for stage II endometrial cancer: a single-institution, retrospective, matched-pair analysis
Objective We aimed to compare the survival and perioperative outcomes of patients with stage II endometrial cancer (EC) undergoing simple hysterectomy (SH) or radical hysterectomy (RH), to validate the various guidelines. Methods A total of 155 consecutive patients diagnosed with stage II EC from 20...
Saved in:
Published in | Journal of international medical research Vol. 47; no. 9; pp. 4469 - 4481 |
---|---|
Main Authors | , , , , , , |
Format | Journal Article |
Language | English |
Published |
London, England
SAGE Publications
01.09.2019
Sage Publications Ltd SAGE Publishing |
Subjects | |
Online Access | Get full text |
Cover
Loading…
Summary: | Objective
We aimed to compare the survival and perioperative outcomes of patients with stage II endometrial cancer (EC) undergoing simple hysterectomy (SH) or radical hysterectomy (RH), to validate the various guidelines.
Methods
A total of 155 consecutive patients diagnosed with stage II EC from 2000 to 2014 were reviewed. We identified 40 pairs of patients (40 SH and 40 RH) who were matched in terms of age, pathological type, and lymphovascular space invasion status using matched-pair analysis. Patient data were collected from medical records and outcomes were determined by telephone follow-up.
Results
Among the 80 patients in the two groups, seven died from tumor recurrence. However, cancer-related survival rates were not significantly different between the SH and RH groups. The 3-year cancer-related survival rates in the SH and RH groups were 94.97% and 92.53%, and the 5-year survival rates were 92.40% and 90.03%, respectively. Regarding perioperative outcomes, the SH group had significantly less intraoperative bleeding and a significantly shorter catheter-indwelling time than the RH group.
Conclusions
SH provides similar survival outcomes and a superior perioperative quality of life compared with RH in patients with stage II EC. |
---|---|
Bibliography: | ObjectType-Article-1 SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1 ObjectType-Feature-2 content type line 23 |
ISSN: | 0300-0605 1473-2300 |
DOI: | 10.1177/0300060519863190 |