Pelvic dysfunctions and quality of life after nerve-sparing radical hysterectomy

A multicenter comparative study

Marcello Ceccaroni, Giovanni Roviglione, Emanuela Spagnolo, Paolo Casadio, Roberto Clarizia, Michele Peiretti, Francesco Bruni, Inge Peters, Giovanni Aletti

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

40 Citations (Scopus)

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.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)581-588
Number of pages8
JournalAnticancer Research
Volume32
Issue number2
Publication statusPublished - Feb 2012

Fingerprint

Hysterectomy
Multicenter Studies
Quality of Life
Uterine Cervical Neoplasms
Fecal Incontinence
Urinary Retention
Survival
Urinary Incontinence
Constipation
Urinary Bladder

Keywords

  • Cervical cancer
  • Laparoscopy
  • Nerve-sparing
  • Pelvic dysfunctions
  • Quality of life
  • Radical hysterectomy

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Cancer Research
  • Oncology

Cite this

Ceccaroni, M., Roviglione, G., Spagnolo, E., Casadio, P., Clarizia, R., Peiretti, M., ... Aletti, G. (2012). Pelvic dysfunctions and quality of life after nerve-sparing radical hysterectomy: A multicenter comparative study. Anticancer Research, 32(2), 581-588.

Pelvic dysfunctions and quality of life after nerve-sparing radical hysterectomy : A multicenter comparative study. / Ceccaroni, Marcello; Roviglione, Giovanni; Spagnolo, Emanuela; Casadio, Paolo; Clarizia, Roberto; Peiretti, Michele; Bruni, Francesco; Peters, Inge; Aletti, Giovanni.

In: Anticancer Research, Vol. 32, No. 2, 02.2012, p. 581-588.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Ceccaroni, M, Roviglione, G, Spagnolo, E, Casadio, P, Clarizia, R, Peiretti, M, Bruni, F, Peters, I & Aletti, G 2012, 'Pelvic dysfunctions and quality of life after nerve-sparing radical hysterectomy: A multicenter comparative study', Anticancer Research, vol. 32, no. 2, pp. 581-588.
Ceccaroni M, Roviglione G, Spagnolo E, Casadio P, Clarizia R, Peiretti M et al. Pelvic dysfunctions and quality of life after nerve-sparing radical hysterectomy: A multicenter comparative study. Anticancer Research. 2012 Feb;32(2):581-588.
Ceccaroni, Marcello ; Roviglione, Giovanni ; Spagnolo, Emanuela ; Casadio, Paolo ; Clarizia, Roberto ; Peiretti, Michele ; Bruni, Francesco ; Peters, Inge ; Aletti, Giovanni. / Pelvic dysfunctions and quality of life after nerve-sparing radical hysterectomy : A multicenter comparative study. In: Anticancer Research. 2012 ; Vol. 32, No. 2. pp. 581-588.
@article{c4cf038ef63d44d58c7d203e5c66a5af,
title = "Pelvic dysfunctions and quality of life after nerve-sparing radical hysterectomy: A multicenter comparative study",
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.",
keywords = "Cervical cancer, Laparoscopy, Nerve-sparing, Pelvic dysfunctions, Quality of life, Radical hysterectomy",
author = "Marcello Ceccaroni and Giovanni Roviglione and Emanuela Spagnolo and Paolo Casadio and Roberto Clarizia and Michele Peiretti and Francesco Bruni and Inge Peters and Giovanni Aletti",
year = "2012",
month = "2",
language = "English",
volume = "32",
pages = "581--588",
journal = "Anticancer Research",
issn = "0250-7005",
publisher = "International Institute of Anticancer Research",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Pelvic dysfunctions and quality of life after nerve-sparing radical hysterectomy

T2 - A multicenter comparative study

AU - Ceccaroni, Marcello

AU - Roviglione, Giovanni

AU - Spagnolo, Emanuela

AU - Casadio, Paolo

AU - Clarizia, Roberto

AU - Peiretti, Michele

AU - Bruni, Francesco

AU - Peters, Inge

AU - Aletti, Giovanni

PY - 2012/2

Y1 - 2012/2

N2 - 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.

AB - 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.

KW - Cervical cancer

KW - Laparoscopy

KW - Nerve-sparing

KW - Pelvic dysfunctions

KW - Quality of life

KW - Radical hysterectomy

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84856849119&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84856849119&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

VL - 32

SP - 581

EP - 588

JO - Anticancer Research

JF - Anticancer Research

SN - 0250-7005

IS - 2

ER -