AIM: To analyze pelvic dysfunctions, quality of life, and survival after nerve-sparing radical hysterectomy (NSRH) compared to classical radical hysterectomy (RH) for cervical cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: All cervical cancer patients undergoing a RH or a NSRH were evaluated for pelvic dysfunctions and filled in a quality-of-life questionnaire. RESULTS: A total of 56 women were included; 31 underwent RH (group 1) and 25 NSRH (group 2). Postoperatively, a higher number of patients had urinary incontinence (p=0.02), urinary retention (p=0.01), faecal incontinence (p=0.01) and constipation (p=0.01) in group 1 versus group 2. Patients referred a higher rate of severe sexual dysfunction after RH compared to NSRH (p=0.03). No differences were found in orgasmic frequency and sexual desire; overall quality of life evaluation was more satisfactory after NSRH. CONCLUSION: NSRH conferred a better clinical outcome with fewer long-term bladder, colorectal and sexual complications. Post-operative quality of life after NSRH was better, with the same overall survival as compared to RH.
Pelvic dysfunctions and quality of life after nerve-sparing radical hysterectomy: a multicenter comparative study / Ceccaroni M; Roviglione G; Spagnolo E; Casadio P; Clarizia R; Peiretti M; Bruni F; Peters I; Aletti G. - In: ANTICANCER RESEARCH. - ISSN 0250-7005. - STAMPA. - 32:2(2012), pp. 1-588.
Pelvic dysfunctions and quality of life after nerve-sparing radical hysterectomy: a multicenter comparative study
Casadio P;
2012
Abstract
AIM: To analyze pelvic dysfunctions, quality of life, and survival after nerve-sparing radical hysterectomy (NSRH) compared to classical radical hysterectomy (RH) for cervical cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: All cervical cancer patients undergoing a RH or a NSRH were evaluated for pelvic dysfunctions and filled in a quality-of-life questionnaire. RESULTS: A total of 56 women were included; 31 underwent RH (group 1) and 25 NSRH (group 2). Postoperatively, a higher number of patients had urinary incontinence (p=0.02), urinary retention (p=0.01), faecal incontinence (p=0.01) and constipation (p=0.01) in group 1 versus group 2. Patients referred a higher rate of severe sexual dysfunction after RH compared to NSRH (p=0.03). No differences were found in orgasmic frequency and sexual desire; overall quality of life evaluation was more satisfactory after NSRH. CONCLUSION: NSRH conferred a better clinical outcome with fewer long-term bladder, colorectal and sexual complications. Post-operative quality of life after NSRH was better, with the same overall survival as compared to RH.I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
