Three classes of radical vaginal hysterectomy for treatment of endometrial and cervical cancer

OBJECTIVES: The aims of this study were to (1) describe three types of extended vaginal hysterectomy with different degree of radicality, (2) to identify possible indications for each one of them, and (3) to encourage individualization of the treatment, with special reference to the reevaluation of the role of vaginal surgery in gynecologic oncology. STUDY DESIGN: The surgical-anatomic principles of radical vaginal surgery and the techniques of three increasingly extended vaginal hysterectomies are illustrated. Possible indications are pointed out on the basis of our personal experience from previously published retrospective studies. RESULTS: Class I extended vaginal hysterectomy allows the “en bloc” dissection of the uterus along with the upper third of vagina and both the adnexa. The parametria are not removed. This procedure has proved to be of value for treatment of stage I endometrial cancer. In the class II extended vaginal hysterectomy the distal tract of the anterior and posterior parametria are preserved, whereas the cardinal ligament is entirely removed. This operation has shown promising results for treatment of stage IB-IIA cervical cancer of small volume while reducing the incidence of bladder and rectal dysfunctions. The class III procedure includes the complete removal of the parametria (anterior, lateral, and posterior). This operation has been shown to provide a high rate of cure for stage IB-IIA cervical cancer. CONCLUSIONS: In view of the several advantages of vaginal surgery, this approach should be considered in the individualized treatment of selected cases of endometrial and cervical cancers. The three classes of radical vaginal hysterectomy allow tailoring the type of vaginal operation to the clinical and physical characteristics of the patients. The combined use of extraperitoneal or laparoscopic lymphadenectomy would considerably extend the indications for radical vaginal operations. (Am J Obstet Gynecol 1996;175:1576-85.)