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 / M. Ceccaroni, G. Roviglione, E. Spagnolo, P. Casadio, R. Clarizia, M. Peiretti, F. Bruni, I. Peters, G. Aletti. - In: ANTICANCER RESEARCH. - ISSN 0250-7005. - 32:2(2012), pp. 581-588.
Pelvic dysfunctions and quality of life after nerve-sparing radical hysterectomy : a multicenter comparative study
G. Aletti
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.File | Dimensione | Formato | |
---|---|---|---|
581.full.pdf
accesso aperto
Tipologia:
Publisher's version/PDF
Dimensione
156.72 kB
Formato
Adobe PDF
|
156.72 kB | Adobe PDF | Visualizza/Apri |
Pubblicazioni consigliate
I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.