ArticleArchives of gynecology and obstetrics2024
A retrospective study on the effect of surgical approaches and uterine manipulators on the prognosis of cervical cancer.
Article in Archives of gynecology and obstetrics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveCervical cancer is a common gynecological malignancy. However, the optimal surgical approach and benefits of uterine manipulator use remain unclear in this context. This study aimed to compare patient outcomes among different surgical approaches including laparoscopic, combined vaginal and laparoscopic, abdominal, and robotic using the da Vinci surgical system. Moreover, we also aimed to examine the impact of uterine manipulator use in radical hysterectomy on the outcomes of patients with cervical cancer.
methodsThis retrospective study included data from 848 patients with cervical cancer stage IA2-IIA2 that underwent a radical hysterectomy and pelvic lymphadenectomy at the Chinese PLA General Hospital between 2009 and 2019. Patient demographic and clinical characteristics, perioperative findings, and postoperative outcomes were examined.
resultsPatient characteristics, including body mass index, age, FIGO stage, pathological type, and tumor differentiation status and size, were comparable. Five-year survival rates were comparable among the groups that underwent different types of surgery regardless of disease stage. Five-year survival rates were comparable between the groups that underwent surgery with and without the use of a uterine manipulator.
conclusionsAll surgical approaches examined in this study had comparable efficacy and safety profiles. The use of uterine manipulators during radical hysterectomy for cervical cancer does not increase the risk of death.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39477834What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.