Objectives The study compared the postoperative prognosis in patients with cervical cancer Ib1 (FIGO 1988) with more than 2 cm, operated by the Piver II and Piver III techniques in a hospital sample in Rio de Janeiro.
Methods The method used consists of a historical analysis of a group of women with cervical cancer in the mentioned stage submitted to the two surgical techniques analyzed. The work seeks to compare them to find an outcome of interests, considering data related to the disease, treatment and post-treatment follow-up obtained in the medical records.
Results Patients submitted to both surgical techniques did not have a significant difference in overall disease-free survival. Prognostic factors, such as lymphatic, parametrial impairment, surgical margins, deep invasion of miocervix and lymphovascular space were shown to be related to worse global and disease-free survival. Tables:
Conclusions Although there was no difference in overall survival and disease free, the group submitted to type C showed more severe tumors, so it would not be possible through the study to suggest a change in technique.
Statistics from Altmetric.com
If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.