Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress 2023 EHA Congress 2023 ASCO Annual Meeting
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

A round-up of the ONWARDS phase 3 clinical trials evaluating the novel weekly insulin icodec in people with diabetes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Annals of Surgical Oncology
Published in: Annals of Surgical Oncology 5/2019

01-05-2019 | Hysterectomy | Urologic Oncology

The Urodynamics and Survival Outcomes of Different Methods of Dissecting the Inferior Hypogastric Plexus in Laparoscopic Nerve-Sparing Radical Hysterectomy of Type C: A Randomized Controlled Study

Authors: Lei Li, MD, Shuiqing Ma, MD, Xianjie Tan, MD, Sen Zhong, MD, Ming Wu, MD

Published in: Annals of Surgical Oncology | Issue 5/2019

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Little data exist about the impact of dissection methods on bladder function during nerve-sparing radical hysterectomy (NSRH). This randomized controlled trial compared the urodynamic and survival outcomes of different methods dissecting the inferior hypogastric plexus (IHP) during laparoscopic NSRH.

Methods

Eligible patients presenting with stage IB cervical cancer from 9 May 2013 to 27 October 2015 were randomized at a ratio of 1:1 and subjected to waterjet (study group) or traditional blunt (control group) dissection of the IHP for laparoscopic type C radical hysterectomy. Participants were subjected to urodynamic evaluations before and after NSRH. The primary measurement was the proportion of patients with residual urine (RU) ≤ 100 ml, while secondary measurements included urodynamic parameters, disease-free survival (DFS), and overall survival (OS).

Results

In total, 191 women met the inclusion criteria, and 160 patients were included in the final analysis, with 80 randomized to each group. At 14 days after NSRH, the study group had more patients with RU ≤ 100 ml than the control group (82.5% vs. 62.5%, p = 0.005). The study group had similar urodynamic outcomes of preoperative and postoperative tests. Comparison with the study group and preoperative tests revealed the control group had significant bladder function impairment at 4 months after NSRH. After a median follow-up of 33 months, the dissection methods had no significant impact on DFS or OS.

Conclusions

Waterjet dissection of the IHP in laparoscopic NSRH resulted in a more rapid return of normal urodynamics without compromising survival outcome.
ClinicalTrials.gov Identifiers NCT03015376 (PUMCH-OBGYN-2013), NCT03291236 (SOCM-1).
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
Zullo MA, Manci N, Angioli R, Muzii L, Panici PB. Vesical dysfunctions after radical hysterectomy for cervical cancer: a critical review. Crit. Rev. Oncol. Hematol. 2003;48:287–93.CrossRef
2.
Xue Z, Zhu X, Teng Y. Comparison of nerve-sparing radical hysterectomy and radical hysterectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Cell Physiol. Biochem. 2016;38:1841–50.CrossRef
3.
Kim HS, Kim K, Ryoo SB, et al. Conventional versus nerve-sparing radical surgery for cervical cancer: a meta-analysis. J. Gynecol. Oncol. 2015;26:100–10.CrossRefPubMedCentral
4.
Kanao H, Fujiwara K, Ebisawa K, Hada T, Ota Y, Andou M. Various types of total laparoscopic nerve-sparing radical hysterectomies and their effects on bladder function. J. Gynecol. Oncol. 2014;25:198–205.CrossRefPubMedCentral
5.
Todo Y, Kuwabara M, Watari H, et al. Urodynamic study on postsurgical bladder function in cervical cancer treated with systematic nerve-sparing radical hysterectomy. Int. J. Gynecol. Cancer 2006;16:369–75.CrossRef
6.
Maneschi F. Urodynamic study of bladder function following nerve sparing radical hysterectomy. J. Gynecol. Oncol. 2014;25:159–61.CrossRefPubMedCentral
7.
Maneschi F, Ianiri P, Sarno M, Gagliardi F, Panici PB. Nerve-sparing class III–IV radical hysterectomy: urodynamic study and surgical technique. Int. J. Gynecol. Cancer 2012;22:675–80.CrossRef
8.
Kruppa J, Kavvadias T, Amann S, Baessler K, Schuessler B. Short and long-term urodynamic and quality of life assessment after nerve sparing radical hysterectomy: a prospective pilot study. Eur. J. Obstet. Gynecol. Reprod. Biol. 2016;201:131–4.CrossRef
9.
Roh JW, Lee DO, Suh DH, et al. Efficacy and oncologic safety of nerve-sparing radical hysterectomy for cervical cancer: a randomized controlled trial. J. Gynecol. Oncol. 2015;26:90–9.CrossRefPubMedCentral
10.
Rob L, Halaska M, Robova H. Nerve-sparing and individually tailored surgery for cervical cancer. Lancet Oncol. 2010;11:292–301.CrossRef
11.
Cibula D, Abu-Rustum NR, Benedetti-Panici P, et al. New classification system of radical hysterectomy: emphasis on a three-dimensional anatomic template for parametrial resection. Gynecol. Oncol. 2011;122:264–8.CrossRef
12.
Querleu D, Morrow CP. Classification of radical hysterectomy. Lancet Oncol. 2008;9:297–303.CrossRef
13.
14.
Du R, Li L, Ma S, Tan X, Zhong S, Wu M. Lymph nodes metastasis in cervical cancer: Incidences, risk factors, consequences and imaging evaluations. Asia Pac. J. Clin. Oncol. 2018;14:e380–e385.CrossRef
15.
Haylen BT, de Ridder D, Freeman RM, et al. An international urogynecological association (IUGA)/international continence society (ICS) joint report on the terminology for female pelvic floor dysfunction. Neurourol. Urodyn. 2010;29:4–20.
16.
Possover M, Stober S, Plaul K, Schneider A. Identification and preservation of the motoric innervation of the bladder in radical hysterectomy type III. Gynecol. Oncol. 2000;79:154–7.CrossRef
17.
Trimbos JB, Maas CP, Deruiter MC, Peters AA, Kenter GG. A nerve-sparing radical hysterectomy: guidelines and feasibility in Western patients. Int. J. Gynecol. Cancer 2001;11:180–6.CrossRef
18.
Kato K, Suzuka K, Osaki T, Tanaka N. Unilateral or bilateral nerve-sparing radical hysterectomy: a surgical technique to preserve the pelvic autonomic nerves while increasing radicality. Int. J. Gynecol. Cancer 2007;17:1172–8.CrossRef
19.
Shi R, Wei W, Jiang P. Laparoscopic nerve-sparing radical hysterectomy for cervical carcinoma: emphasis on nerve content in removed cardinal ligaments. Int. J. Gynecol. Cancer 2016;26:192–198.CrossRef
20.
Liu Z, Li X, Tao Y, et al. Clinical efficacy and safety of laparoscopic nerve-sparing radical hysterectomy for locally advanced cervical cancer. Int. J. Surg. 2016;25:54–58.CrossRef
21.
Oda Y, Todo Y, Hanley S, et al. Risk factors for persistent low bladder compliance after radical hysterectomy. Int. J. Gynecol. Cancer 2011;21:167–72.CrossRef
22.
Pieterse QD, Kenter GG, Maas CP, et al. Self-reported sexual, bowel and bladder function in cervical cancer patients following different treatment modalities: longitudinal prospective cohort study. Int. J. Gynecol. Cancer 2013;23:1717–25.CrossRef
23.
Kim HS, Kim TH, Suh DH, et al. Success factors of laparoscopic nerve-sparing radical hysterectomy for preserving bladder function in patients with cervical cancer: a protocol-based prospective cohort study. Ann. Surg. Oncol. 2015;22:1987–95.CrossRef
24.
Hao M, Wang Z, Wei F, Wang J, Wang W, Ping Y. Cavitron ultrasonic surgical aspirator in laparoscopic nerve-sparing radical hysterectomy: a pilot study. Int. J. Gynecol. Cancer 2016;26(3):594–9.CrossRefPubMedCentral
25.
Katahira A, Niikura H, Kaiho Y, et al. Intraoperative electrical stimulation of the pelvic splanchnic nerves during nerve-sparing radical hysterectomy. Gynecol. Oncol. 2005;98:462–6.CrossRef
26.
Chen CL, Guo HX, Yu YH, et al. The measurement of vesical detrusor electromyographic activity during nerve-sparing radical hysterectomy. Reprod. Sci. 2010;17:1144–52.CrossRef
27.
Tschan CA, Tschan K, Krauss JK, Oertel J. New applicator improves waterjet dissection quality. Br. J. Neurosurg. 2010;24:641–7.CrossRef
28.
Tschan CA, Keiner D, Muller HD, et al. Waterjet dissection of peripheral nerves: an experimental study of the sciatic nerve of rats. Neurosurgery 2010;67:368–76.
29.
Moinzadeh A, Hasan W, Spaliviero M, et al. Water jet assisted laparoscopic partial nephrectomy without hilar clamping in the calf model. J. Urol. 2005;174:317–21.CrossRef
30.
Glybochko PV, Alyaev YG, Rapoport LM, et al. The role of waterjet dissection in improving erectile function and continence after nerve-sparing prostatectomy [in Russian]. Urologiia 2017;(1):43–49.CrossRef
31.
Izquierdo-Luna JS, Campos-Salcedo JG, Estrada-Carrasco CE, Torres-Gomez JJ, Lopez-Silvestre JC, Zapata-Villalba MA. Robot-assisted laparoscopic partial nephrectomy with hydrodissection. Actas Urol. Esp. 2016;40:333–6.CrossRef
32.
Corvin S, Sturm W, Schlatter E, Anastasiadis A, Kuczyk M, Stenzl A. Laparoscopic retroperitoneal lymph-node dissection with the waterjet is technically feasible and safe in testis-cancer patient. J. Endourol. 2005;19:823–6.CrossRef
33.
Shekarriz B, Upadhyay J, Jewett MA. Nerve-sparing retroperitoneal lymphadenectomy using hydro-jet dissection: initial experience. J. Endourol. 2004;18:273–6.CrossRef
34.
Magistro G, Chapple CR, Elhilali M, et al. Emerging minimally invasive treatment options for male lower urinary tract symptoms. Eur. Urol. 2017;72:986–997.CrossRef
35.
Granick M, Rubinsky L, Parthiban C, Shanmugam M, Ramasubbu N. Dispersion risk associated with surgical debridement devices. Wounds 2017;29:E88–E91.CrossRef
36.
Contin P, Kulu Y, Bruckner T, et al. Comparative analysis of late functional outcome following preoperative radiation therapy or chemoradiotherapy and surgery or surgery alone in rectal cancer. Int. J. Colorectal Dis. 2014;29:165–75.CrossRef
Metadata
Title
The Urodynamics and Survival Outcomes of Different Methods of Dissecting the Inferior Hypogastric Plexus in Laparoscopic Nerve-Sparing Radical Hysterectomy of Type C: A Randomized Controlled Study
Authors
Lei Li, MD
Shuiqing Ma, MD
Xianjie Tan, MD
Sen Zhong, MD
Ming Wu, MD
Publication date
01-05-2019
Publisher
Springer International Publishing
Keyword
Hysterectomy
Published in
Annals of Surgical Oncology / Issue 5/2019
Print ISSN: 1068-9265
Electronic ISSN: 1534-4681
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-019-07228-8

Other articles of this Issue 5/2019

Annals of Surgical Oncology 5/2019 Go to the issue

ASO Author Reflections

ASO Author Reflections: Breast Center Accreditation and Performance: Impact on Patient Care?

Thoracic Oncology

Enteral Feeding Access Has an Impact on Outcomes for Patients with Esophageal Cancer Undergoing Esophagectomy: An Analysis of SEER-Medicare

Sarcoma

Femoral Fracture in Primary Soft-Tissue Sarcoma of the Thigh and Groin Treated with Intensity-Modulated Radiation Therapy: Observed versus Expected Risk

Health Services Research and Global Oncology

Value-Based Analysis for Breast Cancer Treatment: We Don’t Know What We Don’t Know

Endocrine Tumors

A Population-Based Study on NIFTP Incidence and Survival: Is NIFTP Really a “Benign” Disease?

Pancreatic Tumors

Oncology Navigation Decreases Time to Treatment in Patients with Pancreatic Malignancy