title: A Retrospective Analysis of the Impact of Myomectomy on Survival in Uterine Sarcoma.
abstract: Laparoscopic myomectomy is a minimally invasive, conservative surgical approach commonly used for the treatment of uterine fibroids. However, there is a lack of effective means to distinguish the nature of uterine tumors prior to surgery. The impact of fibroid morcellation during laparoscopic surgery on the dissemination of cancerous uterine fibroids and long-term survival of patients has gained increasing attention. A retrospective cohort study was conducted to analyze the impact of different surgical approaches on recurrence-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS) in patients with a postoperative pathological diagnosis of uterine sarcoma at a single medical center. Patients who underwent the first surgery for uterine fibroids (confined to the uterus) and had a postoperative pathological diagnosis of uterine sarcoma were selected in the Chinese PLA General Hospital from January 2005 to January 2014. Based on the use of fibroid morcellation, the subjects were divided into fibroid morcellation (FM) and total hysterectomy (TH, non-morcellation) groups. Follow-up outcomes, including RFS and OS times, were observed. In total, 59 patients were included, with 30 cases in the FM group and 29 cases in the TH group. There were no significant differences in RFS and OS time between the two groups (RFS: P = 0.16, OS: P = 0.09). Multivariate correlation analysis showed that the impact of a higher grade level on RFS and OS was nearly 2-fold the impact of a lower grade level (RFS: P = 0.04, odds ratio (OR) = 1.97; OS: P = 0.03, OR = 2.29). Intraoperative morcellation, postoperative adjuvant therapy, age, tumor size, FIGO stage, and surgical approach were not risk factors affecting RFS and OS. Fibroid morcellation during laparoscopic surgery (including laparoscopic, transvaginal and transabdominal approaches) had no significant impact on RFS and OS time in patients. However, the 5-year RFS and OS rates were both lower in the FM group than in the TH group. Grade level was a significant risk factor for the prognosis of patients with uterine sarcoma.
authors.affiliation: Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, General Hospital of Armed Police Forces, 2. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Chinese PLA General Hospital, Beijing, China.
authors.forename: Zhenzhen
authors.initials: Z
authors.lastname: Gao
authors.affiliation: Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Chinese PLA General Hospital, Beijing, China.
authors.forename: Li'an
authors.initials: L
authors.lastname: Li
authors.affiliation: Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Chinese PLA General Hospital, Beijing, China.
authors.forename: Yuanguang
authors.initials: Y
authors.lastname: Meng
mesh_terms: D018572:Disease-Free Survival; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D007044:Hysterectomy; D010535:Laparoscopy; D007889:Leiomyoma / Q000601:surgery; D008875:Middle Aged; D000069577:Morcellation; D015999:Multivariate Analysis; D012189:Retrospective Studies; D012509:Sarcoma / Q000401:mortality* / Q000473:pathology / Q000601:surgery*; D016019:Survival Analysis; D013997:Time Factors; D063186:Uterine Myomectomy; D014594:Uterine Neoplasms / Q000401:mortality* / Q000473:pathology / Q000601:surgery*
references.citation: J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2011 May-Jun;18(3):386-9
references.pmid: 21545964
references.citation: J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2010 Nov-Dec;17(6):719-24
references.pmid: 20655285
references.citation: Gynecol Oncol. 2011 Aug;122(2):255-9
references.pmid: 21565389
references.citation: Ann Surg Oncol. 2011 Nov;18(12):3453-61
references.pmid: 21541824
references.citation: J Obstet Gynaecol Res. 2012 May;38(5):875-9
references.pmid: 22413957
references.citation: J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2014 Sep-Oct;21(5):951-3
references.pmid: 24769447
references.citation: Cancer. 2014 Oct 15;120(20):3154-8
references.pmid: 24923260
references.citation: Gynecol Oncol. 2015 Apr;137(1):167-72
references.pmid: 25462199
references.citation: Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2015 May;212(5):591.e1-8
references.pmid: 25817518
references.citation: Eur J Gynaecol Oncol. 2003;24(3-4):237-40
references.pmid: 12807231
references.citation: Radiographics. 2003 Nov-Dec;23(6):1423-39
references.pmid: 14615554
references.citation: J Natl Cancer Inst. 1986 Mar;76(3):399-402
references.pmid: 3456457
references.citation: Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1990 Apr;162(4):968-74; discussion 974-6
references.pmid: 2327466
references.citation: Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 1992 Jul;99(7):590-4
references.pmid: 1326319
references.citation: Obstet Gynecol. 1994 Mar;83(3):414-8
references.pmid: 8127535
references.citation: J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2006 May-Jun;13(3):183-9
references.pmid: 16698522
references.citation: Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2007 May-Jun;17(3):724-8
references.pmid: 17300682
references.citation: J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2008 Jul-Aug;15(4):466-71
references.pmid: 18588849
references.citation: Gynecol Obstet Fertil. 2009 Feb;37(2):109-14
references.pmid: 19200764
references.citation: Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2009 Feb;19(2):257-60
references.pmid: 19396005