Download PDF
CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd 2019; 79(02): 145-147
DOI: 10.1055/a-0824-7929
GebFra Science
Statement/Stellungnahme
Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York

Updated Opinion of the Uterus Commission of the Gynecological Oncology Working Group (AGO) and the Gynecological Endoscopy Working Group (AGE) of the German Society of Gynecology and Obstetrics (DGGG) on the Randomized Study Comparing Minimally Invasive with Abdominal Radical Hysterectomy for Early-stage Cervical Cancer (LACC)

Article in several languages: English | deutsch
Peter Hillemanns
1   Universitätsfrauenklinik, Medizinische Hochschule Hannover, Hannover, Germany
,
Sara Brucker
2   Universitätsfrauenklinik Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany
,
Bernd Holthaus
3   Frauenklinik, Krankenhaus St. Elisabeth gGmbH, Damme, Germany
,
Rainer Kimmig
4   Universitätsfrauenklinik Essen, Essen, Germany
,
Björn Lampe
5   Frauenklinik, Diakonie Kaiserswerth, Düsseldorf, Germany
,
Ingo Runnebaum
6   Universitätsfrauenklinik Jena, Jena, Germany
,
Uwe Ulrich
7   Frauenklinik, Martin-Luther-Krankenhaus, Berlin, Germany
,
Markus Wallwiener
8   Universitätsfrauenklinik Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
,
Tanja Fehm
9   Universitätsfrauenklinik Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany
,
Clemens Tempfer
10   Universitätsfrauenklinik der Ruhr-Universität Bochum, Bochum, Germany
,
for the AGO Uterus and the AGE of the DGGG › Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

received 08 January 2019

accepted 09 January 2019

Publication Date:
18 February 2019 (online)

Also available at
   Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

In this opinion on the randomized study comparing minimally invasive with abdominal radical hysterectomy for early-stage cervical cancer (LACC), the Uterus Commission of the Gynecological Oncology Working Group (AGO) and the Gynecological Endoscopy Working Group (AGE) of the Germany Society of Gynecology and Obstetrics (DGGG) state that, based on their examination of the published data, patients with FIGO stage IA1 (with LVSI), IA2 or IB1 cervical cancer must be informed about the results of this LACC study prior to making a decision on the route for radical hysterectomy.

Key words

cervical cancer - radical hysterectomy - LACC
 

  • References/Literatur

  • 1 Ramirez PT, Frumovitz M, Pareja R. et al. Minimally Invasive versus Abdominal Radical Hysterectomy for Cervical Cancer. N Engl J Med 2018; DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa1806395.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Melamed A, Margul DJ, Chen L. et al. Survival after Minimally Invasive Radical Hysterectomy for Early-Stage Cervical Cancer. N Engl J Med 2018; DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa1804923.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Lee EJ, Kang H, Kim DH. A comparative study of laparoscopic radical hysterectomy with radical abdominal hysterectomy for early-stage cervical cancer: a long-term follow-up study. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2011; 156: 83-86
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Malzoni M, Tinelli R, Cosentino F. et al. Total laparoscopic radical hysterectomy versus abdominal radical hysterectomy with lymphadenectomy in patients with early cervical cancer: our experience. Ann Surg Oncol 2009; 16: 1316-1323
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Nam JH, Park JY, Kim DY. et al. Laparoscopic versus open radical hysterectomy in early-stage cervical cancer: long-term survival outcomes in a matched cohort study. Ann Oncol 2012; 23: 903-911
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Kong TW, Chang SJ, Piao X. et al. Patterns of recurrence and survival after abdominal versus laparoscopic/robotic radical hysterectomy in patients with early cervical cancer. J Obstet Gynaecol Res 2016; 42: 77-86
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar