Werteim-Meigs Oncology Analyse Security: Laparocopy Versus Laparotomy

Abstract

Study Objective: To evaluate the oncological security of Laparoscopic Radical Hysterectomy (LRH) through analyzes of the surgical specimen, comparing the material removed from the laparotomic approach with the one extracted from the laparoscopy, using the same surgery technique in both.Design: Prospective and randomized study.Setting: All of them had cervical cancer eith FIGO satge IA1 and IIA. Withdrawal in the two groups was made the comparison of the surgery specimens and stil changeable clinics, epidemiologists, of per and posoperative and pathological datas.Patients: Between March/2006 and May/2008, 21 submitted patients were compared Abdominal Radical Hysterectomy (ARH) with others 21 submitted LRH.Intervention: N/AMeasurements and Main Results: The pathological datas had only shown significance in the size of the tumor that was bigger in LRH group: weight of the uterus (NS), size of the tumor (S); histological type (NS); degre of diferrentiation (NS); angiolinfatica invasion (NS); invasion of parametrial (NS); invasion of the vagina (NS); number of pelvic ganglia (NS); invasion of linfods to the right (NS) and the left (NS) and type of linfonod invaded (NS). The measure of the lateral parametrical and the vaginal cuff was not significant (NS) but not to be in posterior vaginal cuff: parametrial length rigth before the tissue processing (NS) and fixed (NS), length of the parametrial lefth before the tissue processing (NS) an fixed (NS), length of anterior vaginal cuff previous the tissue processing (NS) and fixed (NS), length of posterior vaginal cuff previsu the tissue processing (S) and fixed (S).Conclusion: The surgical specimen in LRH, of the pathologic criteria, is similar to the one that of outcome in the ARH approach, suggesting that the oncological security is the same in both ways. However the LRH presents more difficulties to remove the posterior vaginal cuff. Study Objective: To evaluate the oncological security of Laparoscopic Radical Hysterectomy (LRH) through analyzes of the surgical specimen, comparing the material removed from the laparotomic approach with the one extracted from the laparoscopy, using the same surgery technique in both. Design: Prospective and randomized study. Setting: All of them had cervical cancer eith FIGO satge IA1 and IIA. Withdrawal in the two groups was made the comparison of the surgery specimens and stil changeable clinics, epidemiologists, of per and posoperative and pathological datas. Patients: Between March/2006 and May/2008, 21 submitted patients were compared Abdominal Radical Hysterectomy (ARH) with others 21 submitted LRH. Intervention: N/A Measurements and Main Results: The pathological datas had only shown significance in the size of the tumor that was bigger in LRH group: weight of the uterus (NS), size of the tumor (S); histological type (NS); degre of diferrentiation (NS); angiolinfatica invasion (NS); invasion of parametrial (NS); invasion of the vagina (NS); number of pelvic ganglia (NS); invasion of linfods to the right (NS) and the left (NS) and type of linfonod invaded (NS). The measure of the lateral parametrical and the vaginal cuff was not significant (NS) but not to be in posterior vaginal cuff: parametrial length rigth before the tissue processing (NS) and fixed (NS), length of the parametrial lefth before the tissue processing (NS) an fixed (NS), length of anterior vaginal cuff previous the tissue processing (NS) and fixed (NS), length of posterior vaginal cuff previsu the tissue processing (S) and fixed (S). Conclusion: The surgical specimen in LRH, of the pathologic criteria, is similar to the one that of outcome in the ARH approach, suggesting that the oncological security is the same in both ways. However the LRH presents more difficulties to remove the posterior vaginal cuff.