Camilla Di Dio, Ilham Azenkoud, Angelo Trezza, Emanuele Lentini, Tullio Golia D'Augè, Ilaria Cuccu, Giorgia Di Bartolomeo, Ilaria Firulli, Andrea Canicchio, Ludovica Sgamba, Ludovico Muzii
{"title":"Early-stage cervical cancer treatment - what's new?","authors":"Camilla Di Dio, Ilham Azenkoud, Angelo Trezza, Emanuele Lentini, Tullio Golia D'Augè, Ilaria Cuccu, Giorgia Di Bartolomeo, Ilaria Firulli, Andrea Canicchio, Ludovica Sgamba, Ludovico Muzii","doi":"10.5114/pm.2023.127774","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The gold standard of treatment for patients with early-stage cervical cancer is radical hysterectomy, in agreement with the entire scientific community. During the last decade, growing evidence has supported the minimally invasive approach. Several studies have suggested that the minimally invasive approach could improve surgical and perioperative outcomes. Because of these findings, ESCO/ESTRO/ESP guidelines state that a \"minimally invasive approach is favoured\" in comparison with open surgery, as a grade B recommendation. Because of the lack of a grade A recommendation, this randomized Laparoscopic Approach to Cervical Cancer trial evaluated open vs. minimally invasive approach in the early stage. It demonstrated an increase in mortality among patients treated with minimally invasive surgery, revolutionizing current thinking on the primary surgical approach to early cervical cancer. The aim of this study is to analyse which is the best treatment for early cervical cancer and which approach is the most effective at the moment. Further studies are needed to state with certainty the appropriateness of the treatments offered to patients with early cervical cancer.</p>","PeriodicalId":55643,"journal":{"name":"Przeglad Menopauzalny","volume":"22 2","pages":"87-92"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/ee/29/MR-22-50764.PMC10477763.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Przeglad Menopauzalny","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5114/pm.2023.127774","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
The gold standard of treatment for patients with early-stage cervical cancer is radical hysterectomy, in agreement with the entire scientific community. During the last decade, growing evidence has supported the minimally invasive approach. Several studies have suggested that the minimally invasive approach could improve surgical and perioperative outcomes. Because of these findings, ESCO/ESTRO/ESP guidelines state that a "minimally invasive approach is favoured" in comparison with open surgery, as a grade B recommendation. Because of the lack of a grade A recommendation, this randomized Laparoscopic Approach to Cervical Cancer trial evaluated open vs. minimally invasive approach in the early stage. It demonstrated an increase in mortality among patients treated with minimally invasive surgery, revolutionizing current thinking on the primary surgical approach to early cervical cancer. The aim of this study is to analyse which is the best treatment for early cervical cancer and which approach is the most effective at the moment. Further studies are needed to state with certainty the appropriateness of the treatments offered to patients with early cervical cancer.