Background: To compare the long-term survival outcomes between laparoscopic radical hysterectomy (LRH) and open radical hysterectomy (ORH).
Method: We matched patients with stage IA2 to IIA cervical cancer with known risk factors for recurrence who underwent ORH and LRH.
Results: Compared with ORH (n = 263), LRH (n = 263) did not have higher risks of recurrence [hazard ratio (HR) = 1.28; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.62-2.64] or death (HR = 1.46; 95% CI 0.62-3.43). Even in patients with tumors >2 cm in diameter, the risks of recurrence (HR = 0.82; 95% CI 0.31-2.16) or death (HR = 1.01; 95% CI 0.35-2.95) were not higher for LRH than for ORH. The LRH and ORH group had 5-year recurrence-free survival rates of 92.8% and 94.4%, respectively (P = 0.499). LRH resulted in significantly lower estimated blood loss (379.6 versus 541.1 ml, P < 0.001) and shorter postoperative hospital stay (12.5 versus 20.3 days, P < 0.001). Intraoperative complication rates were similar in the two groups (6.8% versus 5.7%, P = 0.711), but postoperative complication rate was lower in the LRH than in the ORH group (9.2% versus 21%, P < 0.001).
Conclusion: LRH is an oncologically safe alternative to ORH and was associated with fewer postoperative complication and earlier recovery.