J Gynecol Oncol.  2015 Apr;26(2):81-82. 10.3802/jgo.2015.26.2.81.

Nerve-sparing radical hysterectomy: time for a new standard of care for cervical cancer?

• Sakuragi N

• KMID: 2160788
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.3802/jgo.2015.26.2.81

Abstract

No abstract available.

MeSH Terms

Female
Humans
Hysterectomy/*methods
*Organ Sparing Treatments
Pelvis/*innervation
Rectum/*innervation
Urinary Bladder/*innervation
Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/*surgery
Uterus/*innervation

Reference

1. Kobayashi T. Abdominal radical hysterectomy with pelvic lymphadenectomy for cancer of the cervix. Tokyo: Nanzando;1961.

2. Sakamoto S, Takizawa K. An improved radical hysterectomy with fewer urological complications and with no loss of therapeutic results for invasive cervical cancer. Baillieres Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 1988; 2:953–962.

3. Sakuragi N, Todo Y, Kudo M, Yamamoto R, Sato T. A systematic nerve-sparing radical hysterectomy technique in invasive cervical cancer for preserving postsurgical bladder function. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2005; 15:389–397.

4. Fujiwara T. Radical hysterectomy. Tokyo: Igaku-Shoin;1984.

5. Hockel M, Konerding MA, Heussel CP. Liposuction-assisted nerve-sparing extended radical hysterectomy: oncologic rationale, surgical anatomy, and feasibility study. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1998; 178:971–976.

6. Yabuki Y, Asamoto A, Hoshiba T, Nishimoto H, Nishikawa Y, Nakajima T. Radical hysterectomy: an anatomic evaluation of parametrial dissection. Gynecol Oncol. 2000; 77:155–163.

7. Maas CP, Kenter GG, Trimbos JB, Deruiter MC. Anatomical basis for nerve-sparing radical hysterectomy: immunohistochemical study of the pelvic autonomic nerves. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2005; 84:868–874.

8. Fujii S, Takakura K, Matsumura N, Higuchi T, Yura S, Mandai M, et al. Anatomic identification and functional outcomes of the nerve sparing Okabayashi radical hysterectomy. Gynecol Oncol. 2007; 107:4–13.

9. Hockel M, Horn LC, Fritsch H. Association between the mesenchymal compartment of uterovaginal organogenesis and local tumour spread in stage IB-IIB cervical carcinoma: a prospective study. Lancet Oncol. 2005; 6:751–756.

10. Long Y, Yao DS, Pan XW, Ou TY. Clinical efficacy and safety of nerve-sparing radical hysterectomy for cervical cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS One. 2014; 9:e94116.

11. Aoun F, van Velthoven R. Lower urinary tract dysfunction after nerve-sparing radical hysterectomy. Int Urogynecol J. 2014; 11. 29. [Epub]. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00192-014-2574-8.

12. Basaran D, Dusek L, Majek O, Cibula D. Oncological outcomes of nerve-sparing radical hysterectomy for cervical cancer: a systematic review. Ann Surg Oncol. 2015; 01. 23. [Epub]. http://dx.doi.org/10.1245/s10434-015-4377-7.

13. Kim HS, Kim K, Ryoo SB, Seo JH, Kim SY, Park JW, et al. Conventional versus nerve-sparing radical surgery for cervical cancer: a meta-analysis. J Gynecol Oncol. 2015; 26:100–110.

14. Bonchek LI. Randomised trials of new procedures: problems and pitfalls. Heart. 1997; 78:535–536.

15. McCulloch P, Taylor I, Sasako M, Lovett B, Griffin D. Randomised trials in surgery: problems and possible solutions. BMJ. 2002; 324:1448–1451.

16. Roh JW, Lee DO, Suh DH, Lim MC, Seo SS, Chung J, et al. Efficacy and oncologic safety of nerve-sparing radical hysterectomy for cervical cancer: a randomized controlled trial. J Gynecol Oncol. 2015; 26:90–99.