Article Text

Download PDFPDF

OP005/#352 Safety of vaginal hysterectomy for cervical cancer: a multicenter cohort study on behalf of the 4C (Canadian cervical cancer collaborative) working group
  1. N Cockburn1,
  2. G Pond1,
  3. L Elit1,
  4. D Vicus2,
  5. S Piedimonte2,
  6. G Nelson3,
  7. C Aubrey3,
  8. M Plante4,
  9. L-A Teo-Fortin4,
  10. S Lau5,
  11. J Kwon6,
  12. A Altman7,
  13. N-B Saunders7,
  14. K Willows8,
  15. N Sadeq8,
  16. T Feigenberg9,
  17. J Sabourin10,
  18. V Samouëlian11 and
  19. L Helpman1
  1. 1McMaster University, Juravinski Cancer Center, Hamilton Health Sciences, Gynecologic Oncology, Hamilton, Canada
  2. 2University of Toronto, Gynecologic Oncology, Toronto, Canada
  3. 3University of Calgary, Department of Oncology, Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Calgary, Canada
  4. 4Hotel Dieu de Quebec, Laval University, Gynecologic Oncology, Quebec City, Canada
  5. 5McGill University, Jewish General Hospital, Gynecology Oncology, Montreal, Canada
  6. 6Vancouver General Hospital, Gynecologic Oncolgoy, Vancouver, Canada
  7. 7University of Manitoba, Gynecologic Oncology, Winnipeg, Canada
  8. 8Dalhousie University, Gynecologic Oncology, Halifax, Canada
  9. 9Trillium Health Partners/University of Toronto, Gynecologic Oncology, Mississauga, Canada
  10. 10Alberta Health Service, Gynecologic Oncology, Edmonton, Canada
  11. 11Gynecologic Oncology Service, CHUM, Université de Montréal, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Montreal, Canada


Objectives Inferior outcomes of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) in cervical cancer may be attributable to exposure of peritoneum to tumor at colpotomy. Vaginal surgery may minimize surgical morbidity while avoiding dissemination. We sought to compare cervical cancer outcomes by surgical approach.

Methods A retrospective cohort study of cervical cancer patients in ten Canadian centers between 2007–2017. Patients with FIGO 2018 stage IA1, LVI+, and stages IA2-IIIC tumors <4cm were included. Patients undergoing MIS, abdominal (AH) and vaginal or laparoscopy-assisted vaginal hysterectomy (CLVH) were compared. PFS and OS were assessed using the product-limit method, and Cox regression was performed to evaluate association of surgery with outcomes.

Results 1066 patients met inclusion criteria (518 MIS, 436 AH and 110 CLVH). Radical hysterectomy was performed in 80% (CLVH), 96.9% (MIS) and 89.8% (AH) of cases. CLVH cases included more adeno/adenosquamous cancers (70.9% vs. 38.3%(MIS) and 50%(AH), p<0.001), more microinvasive disease (30.9% vs 21.4%(MIS) and 15.8%(AH), p=0.005), smaller tumors (8mm vs. 13mm(MIS), 15mm(AH), p=0.006), fewer LVI+ (20.9% vs. 39%(MIS), 35.9%(AH), p=0.001) and similar rates of lymphatic spread (11.1% vs 11.1%(MIS), 9.7%(AH)). CLVH was associated with fewer intraoperative (5.6% vs 5.6%(MIS), 10.1%(AH), p=0.023) and postoperative (11.8% vs 18.9%(MIS), 24.5%(AH), p=0.006) complications and readmissions (4.6% vs. 11.9%(MIS), 13.9%(AH), p=0.028). CLVH was further associated with a lower risk of recurrence, even when adjusted for age and stage (HR=2.6, 95% CI 1.04–6.51 (AH) and HR=3.07, 95% CI 1.23–7.64 (MIS)).

Conclusions CLVH for cervical cancer is associated with excellent perioperative outcomes. Oncological outcomes appear promising and warrant prospective exploration.

Statistics from

Request Permissions

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.