Vaginal Radical Hysterectomy versus Abdominal Radical Hysterectomy in the Treatment of Early-Stage Cervical Cancer

The purpose of this study is to compare the safety, efficacy, and potential benefits of vaginal radical hysterectomy (VRH) versus abdominal radical hysterectomy (ARH) in the treatment of early-stage cervical cancer. We reviewed the charts of our first 52 patients with cervical cancer who underwent a laparoscopic pelvic lymphadenectomy (LPL), followed either by a VRH (Schauta) in 25 cases or ARH in 27 cases. For the 52 patients, the mean lymph nodes count obtained by LPL was 27 (range 8–59), and the only complication was an external iliac vein trauma requiring laparotomy. Both VRH and ARH groups were comparable in terms of age, weight, parity, stage, histology, and tumor volume. The mean blood loss was 400 cc for VRH vs 450 cc for ARH, operating time was 270 min vs 280 min, blood transfusion in 5 vs 4 women, and postoperative stay was 7 days for both groups. The only intraoperative complication in addition to the vein trauma was a cystotomy which occurred in 2 VRH patients. Febrile morbidity was noted in 4 VRH patients vs 9 ARH patients. There were one preperitoneal abscess and one hematoma in the VRH group vs 4 wound infections and 1 hematoma after ARH. Ileus occurred in 1 VRH vs 4 ARH patients. The current mean follow-up time is 27 months (8–52) and there has been one recurrence so far in the ARH group. Even though this is a retrospective study, our data indicate that VRH and ARH are comparable, except for the absence of an abdominal scar and less febrile morbidity with the vaginal approach. However, in our opinion, the main advantage in learning the Schauta operation is that the experience gained allows one to offer radical trachelectomy to selected young patients who wish to preserve their fertility.