Skip to main content
OpenTrials
Completed

NCT Number: NCT07626996

Laparoscopic Versus Open Radical Hysterectomy in Early-Stage Cervical Cancer

The study aims to compare laparoscopic-assisted radical hysterectomy with open radical hysterectomy in women with early-stage cervical cancer. A total of 60 patients diagnosed with FIGO stage IA1, IA2, and IB1 cervical cancer were enrolled and randomly assigned into two equal groups: laparoscopic surgery and open surgery. All patients underwent total hysterectomy, bilateral adnexectomy, and pelvic lymph node dissection.

Perioperative outcomes were evaluated, including operative time, blood loss, complications, and hospital stay, as well as long-term oncological outcomes such as recurrence, recurrence-free survival, and overall survival. Patients were followed for up to three years postoperatively. The findings of this study aim to assess the safety, feasibility, and clinical effectiveness of laparoscopic-assisted surgery compared with the conventional open approach in the management of early-stage cervical cancer.

Completed

Looking for future studies?

Notify Me

Key information

About this study

Cervical cancer remains one of the leading causes of cancer-related morbidity and mortality among women worldwide. Radical hysterectomy is the standard surgical treatment for early-stage cervical cancer. Traditionally, this procedure has been performed through an open abdominal approach; however, minimally invasive techniques, including laparoscopic-assisted radical hysterectomy, have gained increasing attention due to their potential advantages in reducing surgical trauma and improving perioperative recovery.

This study was conducted to compare the clinical and oncological outcomes of laparoscopic-assisted radical hysterectomy versus open radical hysterectomy in patients with early-stage cervical cancer. A total of 60 patients diagnosed with FIGO stage IA1, IA2, and IB1 cervical cancer were included. Participants were admitted to Zagazig University Hospitals between March 2021 and January 2024.

Eligible patients were randomly assigned into two groups: a laparoscopic surgery group and an open surgery group. All patients underwent total hysterectomy, bilateral adnexectomy, and pelvic lymph node dissection. In the laparoscopic group, vaginal stump closure was performed using an endoscopic stapler, whereas in the open group, closure was performed using conventional surgical techniques.

Primary outcomes included perioperative parameters such as operative time, intraoperative blood loss, blood transfusion, complications, hospital stay, and time to removal of urinary catheter and drainage tube. Secondary outcomes included long-term oncological outcomes such as recurrence rate, recurrence-free survival, and overall survival. Patients were followed for up to three years postoperatively.

The study aimed to determine whether laparoscopic-assisted radical hysterectomy provides comparable safety and oncological outcomes to open surgery while offering potential advantages in perioperative recovery. This study was registered retrospectively, as patient enrollment had been completed prior to trial registration, in accordance with journal requirements and to ensure transparency in reporting.

Who can participate

Healthy volunteers accepted: No

Only the study team can determine whether someone qualifies for participation.

Inclusion criteria

  • FIGO stage IA1, IA2, IB1
  • patients with a tumor size < 2 cm by MRI or pathological assessment after conization
  • tumours with histopathological subtypes: squamous cell carcinoma, adenocarcinoma and adeno-squamous carcinoma (
  • patients with adequate; hematopoietic, renal and liver functions:
  • patients with BMI < 35 (
  • patients with age range 38 - 65 years old.

Exclusion criteria

  • patients with mental, heart, bladder, liver, or kidney illness
  • patients who had received pre-operative chemotherapy or radiotherapy pregnant patients
  • patients with incomplete data or lost follow-up
  • patients with radiological evidence of invasion of the outer 1/3 of the cervical stroma or the lower uterine segment.

Treatment and study plan

Laparoscopic Radical Hysterectomy

Procedure

In this procedure, a minimally invasive laparoscopic-assisted radical hysterectomy is performed, including dissection of the pelvic lymph nodes and closure of the vaginal stump with an endoscopic stapler.

Open Radical Hysterectomy

Procedure

A standard open abdominal radical hysterectomy includes dissection of the pelvic lymph nodes and the closure of the vaginal stump.

Primary outcomes

  1. Operative Time

    Time frame: Intraoperative period (day of surgery)

    The surgery duration will be measured in minutes from skin incision to closure.

  2. Intraoperative Blood Loss volume

    Time frame: Intraoperative period

    Assessment of volume of intraoperative blood loss (mL): Estimated blood loss volume measured in millilitres during surgery.

  3. Length of Hospital Stay

    Time frame: Up to 30 days post-surgery

    Duration of hospital stay measured in days from surgery to discharge

Secondary outcomes

  1. Recurrence Rate

    Time frame: Up to 3 years postoperatively

    Assessment of cancer recurrence following surgical intervention during the follow-up period.

Sponsors and collaborators

Lead sponsor

Zagazig University

Other Gov

Registry information

Official study title

Radical Laparoscopic-assisted Hysterectomy Versus Open Radical Hysterectomy in Early-Stage Cervical Cancer: A Comparative Study

Acronym: LAP-OPEN

Important dates

Study start
2021
Primary completion
2024
Study completion
2024
First posted
Jun 4, 2026
Registry last updated
Jun 4, 2026

OpenTrials presents study information sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov. The official registry record should be consulted for the latest information.

View the official ClinicalTrials.gov record (opens in a new tab)

This listing is for discovery and informational purposes only. It is not medical advice, does not guarantee that a study is recruiting, and does not determine eligibility. Contact the study team and a qualified healthcare professional when considering participation.

Published trials that share one or more normalized conditions with this study.