Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41617964›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of clinical oncology2026

Safety and oncologic outcomes of total laparoscopic versus abdominal hysterectomy following diagnostic conization for adenocarcinoma in situ and stage IA1 cervical cancer: a multicenter retrospective study.

Yoshitaka Kaido, Masahiro Kagabu, Yohei Chiba, Sho Sato, Eriko Takatori, Takayuki Nagasawa, Tadahiro Shoji, Manami Sakurai, Tatsuhiko Shigeto, Kenichi Makino and 9 more

Abstract readMulticenter StudyComparative Study
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of clinical oncology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

19 authors.

Yoshitaka KaidoDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Iwate Medical University School of Medicine, 2-1-1, Idaidori, Yahaba, Iwate, 028-3695, Japan.
Masahiro KagabuDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Iwate Medical University School of Medicine, 2-1-1, Idaidori, Yahaba, Iwate, 028-3695, Japan. mkagabu@iwate-med.ac.jp.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0926-1015
Yohei ChibaDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Iwate Medical University School of Medicine, 2-1-1, Idaidori, Yahaba, Iwate, 028-3695, Japan.
Sho SatoDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Iwate Medical University School of Medicine, 2-1-1, Idaidori, Yahaba, Iwate, 028-3695, Japan.
Eriko TakatoriDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Iwate Medical University School of Medicine, 2-1-1, Idaidori, Yahaba, Iwate, 028-3695, Japan.
Takayuki NagasawaDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Iwate Medical University School of Medicine, 2-1-1, Idaidori, Yahaba, Iwate, 028-3695, Japan.
Tadahiro ShojiDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Iwate Medical University School of Medicine, 2-1-1, Idaidori, Yahaba, Iwate, 028-3695, Japan.
Manami SakuraiDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Faculty of Medicine, Hokkaido University, Sapporo, Japan.
Tatsuhiko ShigetoDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Faculty of Medicine, Hirosaki University, Hirosaki, Japan.
Kenichi MakinoDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Faculty of Medicine, Akita University, Akita, Japan.
Tsuyoshi OhtaDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Faculty of Medicine, Yamagata University, Yamagata, Japan.
Shogo ShigetaDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, School of Medicine, Tohoku University, Sendai, Japan.
Tomoyuki NagaiDepartment of Gynecology, Miyagi Cancer Center, Natori, Miyagi, Japan.
Michiko Kaiho-SakumaDepartment of Gynecology, Miyagi Cancer Center, Natori, Miyagi, Japan.
Hidemichi WatariDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Faculty of Medicine, Hokkaido University, Sapporo, Japan.
Satoru NagaseDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Faculty of Medicine, Yamagata University, Yamagata, Japan.
Hideki TokunagaDivision of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Faculty of Medicine, Tohoku Medical and Pharmaceutical University, Sendai, Japan.
Tsukasa BabaDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Iwate Medical University School of Medicine, 2-1-1, Idaidori, Yahaba, Iwate, 028-3695, Japan.
Yoshihito YokoyamaDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Faculty of Medicine, Hirosaki University, Hirosaki, Japan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWhile simple hysterectomy is the standard treatment for adenocarcinoma in situ (AIS) and stage IA1 cervical cancer, minimally invasive surgery has been increasingly adopted. However, evidence on the safety and efficacy of total laparoscopic hysterectomy (TLH) for these conditions remains limited. We compared the safety and efficacy of TLH and total abdominal hysterectomy (TAH) in patients undergoing simple hysterectomy following diagnostic conization.

methodsWe conducted a multicenter retrospective study of 196 patients with cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3 (CIN3), AIS, or stage IA1 cervical cancer who underwent simple hysterectomy following diagnostic conization. Patients were divided into TLH and TAH groups, and intraoperative and postoperative complications and oncologic outcomes were compared.

resultsOperative time was significantly longer in the TLH group, whereas intraoperative blood loss was lower and postoperative hospital stay shorter. No significant difference was noted in severe complication rates, although their patterns varied between groups. Recurrence occurred in one patient (0.5%), a case of CIN3 at the vaginal cuff in the stage IA1 TAH group. No recurrences were observed in patients with AIS or stage IA1 disease in the TLH group.

conclusionsTLH following diagnostic conization for AIS or stage IA1 cervical cancer demonstrated oncologic efficacy comparable to TAH, with a favorable safety profile. TLH may be a reasonable treatment option for carefully selected patients.

Indexed as

Adenocarcinoma in SituHysterectomyLaparoscopyUterine Cervical NeoplasmsAdultAgedConizationFemaleHumansMiddle AgedNeoplasm StagingRetrospective StudiesTreatment OutcomeUterine Cervical DysplasiaAdenocarcinoma in situDiagnostic conizationMinimally invasive surgeryStage IA1 cervical cancerSurgical outcomesTotal laparoscopic hysterectomy

Identifiers

PMID41617964
PMCPMC12932381

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.