Oncologic results of fertility sparing surgery of cervical cancer: An updated systematic review

Ph, Morice; Maulard, Amandine; Schérier, S.; Sanson, Claire; Zarokian, J; Zaccarini, François; Espenel, Sophie; Pautier, Patricia; Leary, Alexandra; Genestie, Catherine; Chargari, Cyrus; Grynberg, M.; Gouy, Sébastien

doi:10.1016/j.ygyno.2022.01.023

Cited by 28 publications

(29 citation statements)

References 63 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Different techniques can be proposed as fertility-sparing surgery for women with cervical cancer, with various oncological and reproductive outcomes [ 100 ]. These outcomes have been extensively discussed in the recent systematic review by Morice et al (2022), which included 5862 patients selected for fertility-sparing surgery [ 100 ]. The study assessed cervical cancer recurrence and pregnancy rates in women after fertility-preserving surgery [ 100 ].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…These outcomes have been extensively discussed in the recent systematic review by Morice et al (2022), which included 5862 patients selected for fertility-sparing surgery [ 100 ]. The study assessed cervical cancer recurrence and pregnancy rates in women after fertility-preserving surgery [ 100 ]. The recurrence rates in women who were treated for stage IB1 cervical cancer were 4.1%, 4.7%, 2.4%, and 5.2% after simple conization/trachelectomy, radical trachelectomy by laparoscopic-vaginal approach, laparotomic or laparoscopic approaches, respectively [ 100 ].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The oncological outcomes in women with stage IB1 cervical cancer are quite similar across the different procedures [ 100 ]. The lowest pregnancy rate was observed in patients that underwent radical trachelectomy by laparotomy (36%) [ 100 ]. The authors suggested that the choice between fertility-sparing procedures intended for the management of cervical cancer should be individualized and based on oncological data of patients, with a balance between the best cure and the best fertility-sparing method and reproductive outcomes [ 100 ].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Reproductive and Obstetric Outcomes after Fertility-Sparing Treatments for Cervical Cancer: Current Approach and Future Directions

Terzić

Makhadiyeva

Bila

et al. 2023

JCM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cervical cancer is one of the leading causes of cancer-related death in women of reproductive age. The established fertility-sparing approaches for the management of early-stage cervical cancer for women who plan pregnancy are associated with a decline in fecundity and an increased risk of pregnancy complications. This article aims to offer an overview of fertility-sparing approaches and the management of potential subfertility and pregnancy complications after these treatments. An extensive search for the available data about infertility and cervical cancer, fertility-sparing techniques in patients with cervical cancer, fertility treatment, obstetrical complications, and pregnancy outcomes in cervical cancer patients was completed. Fertility-preserving procedures such as loop electrosurgical excision procedure (LEEP), cold-knife conization, and trachelectomy in women diagnosed with cervical cancer can be considered as safe and effective treatments that preserve reproductive potential. Current fertility-preserving procedures, based on the balance of the oncological characteristics of patients as well as their desire for reproduction, allow one to obtain acceptable reproductive and obstetric outcomes in women treated for cervical cancer. Nevertheless, careful monitoring of pregnancies obtained after fertility-preserving procedures is recommended, since this cohort of patients should be considered at higher risk compared with a healthy population.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Reproductive and Obstetric Outcomes after Fertility-Sparing Treatments for Cervical Cancer: Current Approach and Future Directions

Terzić

Makhadiyeva

Bila

et al. 2023

JCM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It has been reported that conization combined with neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) is used in IB1 patients without medium and high risk [ 7 , 8 ]. Morice P et al [ 9 ] found that the oncological results were remarkably similar in patients with stage IB1 cevical cancer treated by different surgical modalities (conization, simple trachelectomy and RT). Fertility-sparing surgery could be performed after NACT for early-stage cervical cancer patients with tumor diameter of 2–4 cm who require fertility preservation [ 10 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Fertility-sparing surgery in early-stage cervical cancer: laparoscopic versus abdominal radical trachelectomy

Bian

Xie

2022

BMC Women's Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Radical trachelectomy is an acceptable alternative to radical hysterectomy for patients with early-stage cervical cancer who wish to preserve reproductive function. This study is designed to compare the laparoscopic versus abdominal radical trachelectomy and provide oncological and obstetric outcome data on patients who have undergone fertility-sparing surgery. Methods We retrospectively analyzed all early-stage cervical cancer patients who underwent abdominal radical trachelectomy (ART) or laparoscopic radical trachelectomy (LRT) between January 2005 and June 2017 in West China Second University Hospital, Sichuan University. Patients' clinical details and follow-up were obtained from hospital records. Results A total of 33 patients (5 with IA1, 2 with IA2, and 26 with 1B1) were included, including 18 patients treated with ART and 15 patients treated with LRT. The median age at initial diagnosis was 30.00 ± 4.30 years (range 22–39). The mean follow-up time was 74.67 months. Among the 33 patients, 2 patients (6.06%, 1 abdominal/1 laparoscopic) developed recurrence, and there are no evidence of disease for the remaining 31 patients till now. The overall survival rate 96.99% (32/33). The LRT group had a shorter hospital stay (P = 0.01) and less blood loss (P < 0.01) than the ART group. There is no significant difference in the length of operative time (P = 0.48) between the two surgical routes. Overall, 15/33 patients (45.45%) have tried to conceive. 6 (40.00%) patients were pregnant and 6 (40.00%) patients were infertility. The ART group had a higher clinical pregnancy rate (P = 0.03) than the LRT group. Conclusions There is no statistically significant difference in oncological outcome between the two surgical approaches. The clinical pregnancy rate in the ART group was significant higher than that in the LRT group. However, LRT resulted in less blood loss and decreased length of hospital stay.

show abstract

Fertility‐sparing and minimally invasive surgery for early‐stage cervical cancer

Shvygin,

Manning‐Geist,

Sonoda

2023

Journal of Surgical Oncology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Oncologic results of fertility sparing surgery of cervical cancer: An updated systematic review

Cited by 28 publications

References 63 publications

Reproductive and Obstetric Outcomes after Fertility-Sparing Treatments for Cervical Cancer: Current Approach and Future Directions

Reproductive and Obstetric Outcomes after Fertility-Sparing Treatments for Cervical Cancer: Current Approach and Future Directions

Fertility-sparing surgery in early-stage cervical cancer: laparoscopic versus abdominal radical trachelectomy

Fertility‐sparing and minimally invasive surgery for early‐stage cervical cancer

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About