title: Completed versus aborted radical hysterectomy for node-positive stage IB cervical cancer in the modern era of chemoradiation therapy.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  Debate continues about optimal management of patients with node-positive stage I cervical cancer. Our objective was to determine if patient outcomes are affected by radical hysterectomy in the modern era of adjuvant chemoradiation.
  
  
  METHODS
  Cervical cancer patients diagnosed from 2000 to 2008 were identified. Demographics, therapy, clinicopathologic data, progression free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), total radiation exposure, and grade 3-4 complications were analyzed by student t, Mann-Whitney, Fisher's exact, Kaplan-Meier, and log rank tests.
  
  
  RESULTS
  This single-institution review evaluated forty-one of 334 (13.4%) patients scheduled to undergo radical hysterectomy that had gross nodal disease diagnosed intraoperatively. 15 underwent aborted radical hysterectomy following lymphadenectomy; the remaining 26 underwent radical hysterectomy and lymphadenectomy. Eleven patients undergoing radical hysterectomy underwent whole pelvic radiation therapy (WPRT) while 8 (30.7%) patients underwent WPRT and postoperative vaginal brachytherapy (BT) for local treatment secondary to close margins. All patients undergoing aborted radical hysterectomy underwent WPRT and BT. With mean follow-up of 42.3 months, there were no significant differences in urinary, gastrointestinal, or hematologic complications between groups. When comparing those undergoing radical hysterectomy to aborted radical hysterectomy, there were no significant differences in local recurrence (11.5% vs 26.7%, p=0.39) or distant recurrence (19.2% vs. 33.3%, p=0.45), PFS (74.9 months vs 46.8 months, p=0.106), or OS (91.8 months vs 69.4 months, p=0.886).
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Treatment of patients with early stage cervical cancer and nodal metastasis may be tailored intraoperatively. Completion of radical hysterectomy and lymphadenectomy decreases radiation exposure without apparently compromising safety or outcome in the era of adjuvant chemoradiation.
authors.affiliation: University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA. aziebart@gmail.com
authors.forename: Angela J
authors.initials: AJ
authors.lastname: Ziebarth
authors.forename: Haller
authors.initials: H
authors.lastname: Smith
authors.forename: Mary E
authors.initials: ME
authors.lastname: Killian
authors.forename: Nguyet A
authors.initials: NA
authors.lastname: Nguyen
authors.forename: Jennifer K
authors.initials: JK
authors.lastname: Durst
authors.forename: Akila
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: Subramaniam
authors.forename: Kenneth H
authors.initials: KH
authors.lastname: Kim
authors.forename: Charles A
authors.initials: CA
authors.lastname: Leath
authors.forename: J Michael
authors.initials: JM
authors.lastname: Straughn
authors.forename: Ronald D
authors.initials: RD
authors.lastname: Alvarez
mesh_terms: D000328:Adult; D001918:Brachytherapy; D018572:Disease-Free Survival; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D007044:Hysterectomy / Q000379:methods; D008197:Lymph Node Excision; D008207:Lymphatic Metastasis; D008875:Middle Aged; D009367:Neoplasm Staging; D018714:Radiotherapy, Adjuvant; D016896:Treatment Outcome; D002583:Uterine Cervical Neoplasms / Q000473:pathology / Q000532:radiotherapy* / Q000601:surgery*