Radical abdominal versus laparoscopic hysterectomy for stage IB cervical cancer: what's the point?
OBJECTIVE
To evaluate surgical morbidity and length of stay for type III radical abdominal hysterectomy performed in the private practice setting, and to compare these results with currently available data on laparoscopic radical hysterectomy.


METHODS
One hundred seventy-five consecutive type III radical abdominal hysterectomies performed by the author in a uniform fashion over a ten-year period for patients with stage IB cervical cancer were evaluated. All surgeries were performed in private community hospitals in New Jersey.


RESULTS
Type III radical abdominal hysterectomy performed in the private setting using the author's protocol resulted in lower surgical morbidity, equivalent hospital stay and resumption of normal activities, and much shorter operating times than laparoscopic radical hysterectomy.


CONCLUSIONS
Laparoscopic radical hysterectomy provides no surgical or financial advantage over radical abdominal hysterectomy when the latter is performed in the private practice setting; results from laparoscopic surgery are inferior with respect to morbidity.
Patsner
B
B
New Jersey Gynecologic Oncology Service, PA., Little Silver 07739, USA.
D000230:Adenocarcinoma / Q000473:pathology / Q000601:surgery*; D000328:Adult; D000368:Aged; D002294:Carcinoma, Squamous Cell / Q000473:pathology / Q000601:surgery*; D005260:Female; D016304:Hospitals, Private; D006801:Humans; D007044:Hysterectomy / Q000009:adverse effects / Q000379:methods*; D010535:Laparoscopy / Q000009:adverse effects / Q000379:methods*; D007902:Length of Stay; D008875:Middle Aged; D009017:Morbidity; D009367:Neoplasm Staging; D011331:Private Practice; D002583:Uterine Cervical Neoplasms / Q000473:pathology / Q000601:surgery*