Can sentinel lymph node biopsy replace pelvic lymphadenectomy for early cervical cancer?

Abstract

ObjectiveEvaluate recurrence-free survival (RFS) and short-term morbidity in patients with early cervical cancer who undergo bilateral pelvic lymphadenectomy (BPLND) versus bilateral sentinel lymph node biopsy only (BSLNB) at primary surgery. MethodsAll patients with pathologically confirmed node negative stage IA/IB cervical cancer managed with BPLND or BSLNB were identified in the University of Toronto's prospective cervical cancer database from May 1984–June 2015. Groups were compared with Wilcoxon rank-sum, Chi-square, and Fisher's exact tests. Predictors of RFS were identified with Cox proportional hazard models. Kaplan-Meier survival curves were compared. Statistical significance was p<0.05. Results1188 node negative patients were identified, BPLND-1078; BSLNB-110. There was no difference between BPLND and BSLNB in 2 and 5year RFS (95% vs 97% and 92% vs 93% respectively), tumor size, histology, invasion depth, intra-operative complications or short-term morbidity. BPLND was associated with increased surgical time (2.8 vs 2.0h, p<0.001), blood loss (500mL vs 100mL, p<0.001), transfusion (23% vs 0%, p<0.001) and post-operative infection (11% vs 0%, p=0.001). Age, surgery date, stage, LVSI, and radicality of surgery differed between groups. Controlling for age, stage, LVSI, invasion depth and histology, there was no significant difference in RFS between groups. Only invasion depth, LVSI and histology were predictors of RFS. ConclusionA negative BSLNB is not associated with a difference in RFS compared to a negative BPLND. Short-term morbidity may be reduced, however due to the long study period, changes in demographics and surgery may contribute to differences noted.