Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Meta-Analysis
. 2019 Mar-Apr;26(3):417-426.e6.
doi: 10.1016/j.jmig.2018.10.012. Epub 2018 Oct 22.

Laparoscopic Nerve-Sparing Radical Hysterectomy vs Laparoscopic Radical Hysterectomy in Cervical Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Clinical Efficacy and Bladder Dysfunction

Affiliations
Meta-Analysis

Laparoscopic Nerve-Sparing Radical Hysterectomy vs Laparoscopic Radical Hysterectomy in Cervical Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Clinical Efficacy and Bladder Dysfunction

Jiayue Wu et al. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2019 Mar-Apr.

Abstract

It is widely accepted that nerve-sparing radical hysterectomy is associated with less postoperative morbidity compared with radical hysterectomy, whereas clinical safety is similar in the 2 procedures. However, there is insufficient evidence to compare these procedures performed via a laparoscopic approach. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies to compare the clinical efficacy and the rate of bladder dysfunction, including urodynamic assessment, in laparoscopic nerve-sparing radical hysterectomy (LNSRH) and laparoscopic radical hysterectomy (LRH). Thirty articles including a total of 2743 participants were analyzed. Operating times were shorter (MD, 29.88 minutes; 95% confidence interval [CI], 11.92-47.83 minutes) and hospital stays were longer (MD, -1.56 days; 95% CI, -2.27 to -0.84 days) in the LRH group compared with the LNSRH group. In addition, blood loss and the number of resected lymph nodes were not significantly different between the 2 groups. However, resected parametrium length (MD, -0.02 cm; 95% CI, -0.05 to -0.00 cm) and vaginal cuff width (MD, -0.06 cm; 95% CI, -0.09 to -0.04) were smaller in the LNSRH group. Furthermore, LNSRH tended to result in more satisfactory micturition (odds ratio, 2.90; 95% CI, 2.01-4.19), shorter catheterization time (MD, -7.20 days; 95% CI, -8.10 to -6.29 days), and shorter recovery to normal postvoid residual urine time (MD, -7.71 days; 95% CI, -8.92 to -6.50 days). Other bladder dysfunction symptoms, including urinary retention, nocturia, dysuria, urinary incontinence, and frequency/urgency were more frequent in the LRH group. Furthermore, LNSRH achieved better results in urodynamic assessments (all p < .05). In conclusion, LNSRH was associated with lower rates of impaired bladder function and a shorter extent of resection compared with LRH. Clinical applications involving LNSRH should be explored with caution.

Keywords: Bladder dysfunction; Cervical cancer; Laparoscopic radical hysterectomy; Nerve-sparing; Urodynamic measurement.

PubMed Disclaimer

MeSH terms