Background In order to simplify the complicated procedure of nerve-sparing radical hysterectomy, a novel technique characterized by integral preservation of the autonomic nerve plane has been employed for invasive cer...Background In order to simplify the complicated procedure of nerve-sparing radical hysterectomy, a novel technique characterized by integral preservation of the autonomic nerve plane has been employed for invasive cervical cancer. The objective of this study was to introduce the nerve plane-sparing radical hysterectomy technique and compare its efficacy and safety with that of nerve-sparing radical hysterectomy. Methods From September 2006 to August 2010, 73 consecutive patients with International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics stage IB to IIA cervical cancer underwent radical hysterectomy with two different nerve-sparing approaches. Nerve-sparing radical hysterectomy was performed for the first 16 patients （nerve-sparing radical hysterectomy group）. The detailed autenomic nerve structures were identified and separated by meticulous dissection during this procedure. After January 2008, the nerve plane-sparing radical hysterectomy procedure was developed and performed for the next 57 patients （nerve plane-sparing radical hysterectomy group）. During this modified procedure, the nerve plane （meso-ureter and its extens;ion） containing most of the autonomic nerve structures was integrally preserved. The patients＇ clinicopathologic characteristics, surgical parameters, and outcomes of postoperative bladder function were compared between the two groups. Results There were no significant differences between the nerve plane-sparing radical hysterectomy and nerve-sparing radical hysterectomy groups regarding age, International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics stage, pathological type, preoperative treatment, or need for intraoperative blood transfusion. The nerve plane-sparing radical hysterectomy group had a higher body mass index than that of the nerve-sparing radical hysterectomy group （P=0.028）. The mean surgical duration in the nerve plane-sparing radical hysterectomy and nerve-sparing radical hysterectomy groups were （262_＋46） minutes and （341＋36） minutes （P 〈0.01）. On the 8th postoperative day, 41 （71.9%） patients in the nerve plane-sparing radical hysterectomy group and nine （56.3%） patients in the nerve-sparing radical hysterectomy group had a postvoid residual urine volume of 〈100 ml （P=0.233）. The median duration of catheterization was eight days （range 8-23 days） for the nerve plane-sparing radical hysterectomy group and eight days （range 8-22 days） for the nerve-sparing radical hysterectomy group （P=-0.509）. Neither surgery-related injury nor pathologically positive margins were reported in either group. Conclusion Nerve plane-sparing radical hysterectomy is a reproducible and simplified modification of nerve-sparing radical hysterectomy, and may be preferable to nerve-sparing radical hysterectomy for treatment of early-stage invasive cervical cancer.展开更多
文摘Background In order to simplify the complicated procedure of nerve-sparing radical hysterectomy, a novel technique characterized by integral preservation of the autonomic nerve plane has been employed for invasive cervical cancer. The objective of this study was to introduce the nerve plane-sparing radical hysterectomy technique and compare its efficacy and safety with that of nerve-sparing radical hysterectomy. Methods From September 2006 to August 2010, 73 consecutive patients with International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics stage IB to IIA cervical cancer underwent radical hysterectomy with two different nerve-sparing approaches. Nerve-sparing radical hysterectomy was performed for the first 16 patients （nerve-sparing radical hysterectomy group）. The detailed autenomic nerve structures were identified and separated by meticulous dissection during this procedure. After January 2008, the nerve plane-sparing radical hysterectomy procedure was developed and performed for the next 57 patients （nerve plane-sparing radical hysterectomy group）. During this modified procedure, the nerve plane （meso-ureter and its extens;ion） containing most of the autonomic nerve structures was integrally preserved. The patients＇ clinicopathologic characteristics, surgical parameters, and outcomes of postoperative bladder function were compared between the two groups. Results There were no significant differences between the nerve plane-sparing radical hysterectomy and nerve-sparing radical hysterectomy groups regarding age, International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics stage, pathological type, preoperative treatment, or need for intraoperative blood transfusion. The nerve plane-sparing radical hysterectomy group had a higher body mass index than that of the nerve-sparing radical hysterectomy group （P=0.028）. The mean surgical duration in the nerve plane-sparing radical hysterectomy and nerve-sparing radical hysterectomy groups were （262_＋46） minutes and （341＋36） minutes （P 〈0.01）. On the 8th postoperative day, 41 （71.9%） patients in the nerve plane-sparing radical hysterectomy group and nine （56.3%） patients in the nerve-sparing radical hysterectomy group had a postvoid residual urine volume of 〈100 ml （P=0.233）. The median duration of catheterization was eight days （range 8-23 days） for the nerve plane-sparing radical hysterectomy group and eight days （range 8-22 days） for the nerve-sparing radical hysterectomy group （P=-0.509）. Neither surgery-related injury nor pathologically positive margins were reported in either group. Conclusion Nerve plane-sparing radical hysterectomy is a reproducible and simplified modification of nerve-sparing radical hysterectomy, and may be preferable to nerve-sparing radical hysterectomy for treatment of early-stage invasive cervical cancer.
