

Add to Cart
Model | Name | Specifications |
HF3063 | Uterine biopsy forceps | / |
HF3062 | Cervical dilator | / |
HF3061 | Hyteromyoma separator | / |
HF3060 | Hook | / |
Package detail: | Poly bag and special shockproof paper box. |
Delivery detail: | By air |
FAQ
Whether minimally invasive surgery is suitable for all types of gynecological cancer is a complex question that needs to be considered based on multiple factors such as the specific cancer type, patient status, and surgical method.
For early-stage cervical cancer (such as stage IA and stage IB1),
some studies have shown that there is no significant difference in
prognosis between minimally invasive surgery and open surgery. For
example, some studies have pointed out that among patients with
stage IA cervical cancer, there is no significant difference in
mortality and recurrence rates between the minimally invasive group
and the open group.
. In addition, some retrospective studies also support this view,
believing that for patients with early-stage cervical cancer less
than 2 cm in diameter, the prognosis of minimally invasive surgery
is not inferior to open surgery.
.
However, there is also evidence that minimally invasive surgery may be inferior to open surgery in some circumstances. For example, research from the Anderson Cancer Center in the United States found that for patients with early-stage cervical cancer, minimally invasive surgery has lower disease-free survival and overall survival rates than open surgery.
. In addition, the Chinese expert consensus also pointed out that
there is currently insufficient evidence to completely ban
minimally invasive surgery for cervical cancer, but the method of
lifting the uterus should be improved and the training of
gynecological oncologists should be strengthened.
.
For ovarian cancer, especially early-stage ovarian cancer, robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery has certain advantages in short-term efficacy, but the long-term efficacy still needs further research.
. For advanced ovarian cancer, minimally invasive surgery has
greater limitations due to its extensive lesions and the need for
full abdominal exploration and complete resection of extensive
metastases.
.
In addition, minimally invasive surgery is also widely used in the treatment of endometrial cancer. According to guidelines from the European Federation of Gynecological Oncology and others, vaginal hysterectomy combined with bilateral adnexectomy may be considered in patients who are candidates for standard surgical treatment.
. However, for patients who cannot undergo optimal off-body surgery
using minimally invasive techniques, they should be converted to
open surgery.
.
Minimally invasive surgery is appropriate in certain types of gynecological cancers, particularly early-stage cervical cancer and early-stage ovarian cancer. However, not all types of gynecological cancer are suitable for minimally invasive surgery, especially for those with larger lesions, advanced stages, or special tissue types. Open surgery may be a safer option. Therefore, when choosing a surgical method, factors such as the patient's condition, the specific characteristics of the tumor, and the doctor's experience must be fully considered, and the decision must be made with fully informed consent.
In the treatment of early cervical cancer, there is some
controversy and different research results on the effectiveness of
minimally invasive surgery compared with laparotomy.
On the one hand, there is evidence that minimally invasive surgery has the advantages of less trauma, less bleeding, and low postoperative infection rate.
. However, multiple high-level evidence-based medical evidence
shows that among patients with early-stage cervical cancer, the
prognosis of patients who undergo laparotomy is significantly
better than that of patients who undergo minimally invasive
surgery.
. For example, the LACC trial found that disease-free survival was
lower in the minimally invasive surgery group compared with open
surgery (3-year disease-free survival 91.2% vs 97.1%, HR 3.74, 95%
CI 1.63–8.58), and Associated with higher mortality and more severe
local recurrence
. Another study also pointed out that the 4.5-year disease-free
survival rate of patients who underwent minimally invasive surgery
was significantly lower than that of the laparotomy group (86% vs
96.5%), and the 3-year overall survival rate was significantly
lower than that of the laparotomy group ( 93.8% vs 99.0%)
.
In addition, some meta-analyses and retrospective studies also
support this view. For example, a meta-analysis of 49 high-quality
observational studies showed that minimally invasive surgery is
associated with higher recurrence and mortality rates compared with
open surgery.
. Another European multicenter, retrospective, observational cohort
study also found that minimally invasive surgery was associated
with higher recurrence and mortality rates compared with open
surgery.
.
Nonetheless, there is some literature that suggests minimally
invasive surgery may have advantages in some aspects. For example,
studies have shown that minimally invasive surgery leads to higher
survival rates and better prognosis in patients with early-stage
cervical cancer
. However, the results of these studies are inconsistent and have
certain limitations, such as case mismatch bias.
.
Taken together, the current evidence tends to believe that
laparotomy has a better prognosis than minimally invasive surgery
in the treatment of early-stage cervical cancer. Therefore, when
choosing a surgical method, the patient's individual situation
should be fully considered, and the risks and benefits of different
surgical routes should be clearly informed to the patient to make
an informed consent decision.
.
For advanced ovarian cancer, the limitations of minimally invasive
surgery are mainly reflected in the following aspects:
Tumor staging and detection of occult disease: Although minimally invasive surgery can be used in patients with early-stage ovarian cancer, its limitations in comprehensive assessment of tumor stage are significant. About 30% of patients will have their tumor stage improved after comprehensive surgical staging.
. This suggests that minimally invasive surgery may not completely
rule out the presence of more advanced ovarian cancer.
Postoperative complications: Although laparoscopic exploration
helps to develop individualized treatment plans and avoid
unnecessary laparotomy, the postoperative puncture hole may cause
tumor implantation or metastasis, and there are also risks of
anesthesia, organ damage, and incision infection. complications
.
High technical requirements: Although robotic surgery is superior
to traditional laparotomy in some aspects, such as less
intraoperative blood loss, shorter hospital stay, and lower
incidence of postoperative complications, its clinical efficacy is
not obvious compared with laparoscopic surgery. differences, and
did not take into account the clinical stage and tissue type of
ovarian cancer patients, which may affect the results.
.
Limited scope of application: Non-surgical treatment (NACT) may be more suitable for patients with poor performance status, tumor consumption status, or combined chronic diseases.
. In addition, although robotic single-caliber surgery has certain
advantages in terms of safe tissue extraction, aesthetics, and
reduction of pain and incision complications, it still needs to be
used with caution in the case of widespread spread.
.
Risks in Elderly Patients: Elderly patients need to be more
cautious when choosing a surgical approach due to increased risks
of surgical morbidity and mortality. Although minimally invasive
procedures are feasible in some cases, their effectiveness and
safety still require further research and verification
.
In the treatment of endometrial cancer, the effects of minimally
invasive surgery and open surgery are compared as follows:
Minimally invasive surgery, such as laparoscopic surgery, has shown significant clinical results in the treatment of early-stage endometrial cancer. Studies have shown that laparoscopic surgery can effectively reduce patients’ intraoperative bleeding and incidence of adverse reactions, and allow for faster postoperative recovery.
. In addition, the overall treatment effectiveness of minimally
invasive surgery is also significantly higher than that of open
surgery.
.
Minimally invasive surgery results in faster post-operative
recovery and shorter hospital stays. For example, laparoscopic
surgery usually takes 3-5 days to leave the hospital, while
traditional laparotomy surgery takes 7-15 days
. This is mainly due to the fact that minimally invasive surgery
has less interference with organ function and reduces the risk of
postoperative complications.
.
Compared with open surgery, minimally invasive surgery has obvious
advantages such as fewer surgical incision infections, faster
postoperative recovery, shorter hospitalization time, less blood
transfusion, and fewer thrombotic diseases.
. However, although the overall safety of minimally invasive
surgery is high, its related complications still need to be paid
attention to, especially the safety of robot-assisted laparoscopic
surgery is still controversial.
.
Minimally invasive surgery has less impact on the patient's quality
of life. Studies have shown that patients who underwent
laparoscopic surgery had significantly higher postoperative quality
of life scores than those who underwent laparotomy.
.
Since open surgery requires laparotomy, the incision is large,
usually larger than 10 cm, which affects the appearance; while the
incision of minimally invasive surgery is only 0.5-1 cm, leaving
basically no scars.
. In addition, open surgery is often accompanied by pain at the
incision site, while minimally invasive surgery uses intravenous
anesthesia, and the patient can complete the surgery while
sleeping, with less pain.
.
In the treatment of endometrial cancer, minimally invasive surgery has significant clinical advantages over open surgery, including less intraoperative bleeding, lower incidence of adverse reactions, faster postoperative recovery, and better Good quality of life.
The latest advances in minimally invasive surgery in the treatment
of gynecological tumors mainly focus on the following aspects:
Laparoscopic radical hysterectomy (LRH) and robot-assisted radical
hysterectomy (RRH) have been widely used in recent years. Studies
have shown that these two minimally invasive surgical methods have
no significant difference in recurrence and mortality compared with
traditional laparotomy, but they have shorter hospital stay, less
bleeding and fewer complications.
.
Single-port laparoscopic surgery technology has evolved from the
initial multi-port laparoscopy to the current transumbilical
single-port laparoscopic surgery, and even includes transvaginal
single-port laparoscopic surgery. This technology further reduces
patient trauma and recovery time, allowing patients to receive more
minimally invasive and better treatment results.
.
Robotic systems such as the da Vinci system, due to their 3D
high-definition images, panoramic vision, and flexible arms, can
better separate parauterine and retroperitoneal tissues, thus
improving the safety and effectiveness of surgery. Although some
studies have questioned its survival outcomes in patients with
early-stage cervical cancer, overall, RRH is increasingly used in
clinical applications.
.
Although existing retrospective studies have shown many advantages
of minimally invasive surgery, due to the bias problem of case
mismatch, more prospective randomized controlled clinical studies
are still needed to more objectively and accurately compare the
tumor treatment outcomes of the two surgical methods.
.
The treatment of gynecological tumors is not limited to a single
minimally invasive surgery, but also includes comprehensive
treatments such as chemotherapy, radiotherapy, and immunotherapy.
The combined use of these approaches may increase patient survival
and improve outcomes
.
New treatment methods including minimally invasive surgery guided
by magnetic resonance and high-dose radiotherapy are also
constantly being explored and applied, aiming to improve the
quality of diagnosis and treatment of gynecological tumors.
.
With the continuous development of minimally invasive techniques,
the training of gynecological oncologists has become particularly
important. Minimally invasive surgeries for gynecological malignant
tumors should have strict access requirements, and it is strictly
prohibited for doctors who are still in training or who are
unqualified to perform gynecological tumor surgeries.
.
Choosing the most appropriate treatment for gynecological cancer
requires comprehensive consideration of the patient's specific
condition, including the type, stage, pathological type, location
of the tumor, age and physical condition of the patient, and other
factors. The following is a detailed explanation of the treatment
options for different gynecological cancers based on the
information I searched:
1. Endometrial cancer
For primary endometrial cancer, surgery, radiotherapy, and/or
chemotherapy are recommended, emphasizing the importance of
multi-omics discussions
. The specific plans are as follows:
Early stage disease: Radical surgery alone or radiotherapy are
options, both are equally effective.
.
Locally advanced disease: Maximum resection where feasible is
recommended, with the option of surgery, radiotherapy, or
chemotherapy based on tumor stage and patient preference
.
Residual pelvic or abdominal aortic disease: Combination of
chemotherapy and radiation therapy, or chemotherapy alone is
recommended
.
2. Cervical cancer
Treatment methods for cervical cancer include surgery,
radiotherapy, and chemotherapy. The specific selection should take
into account factors such as the patient’s age, pathological type,
and stage.
:
Patients with stage I B to IVA: surgery or radiotherapy are
options, including modified radical or radical hysterectomy and
pelvic lymphadenectomy
.
Simultaneous chemoradiotherapy: For intermediate and advanced
cervical cancer and locally advanced cervical cancer,
cisplatin-based concurrent chemoradiotherapy is used
.
Recurrent cervical cancer: generally supportive care or
platinum-containing double-drug systemic chemotherapy
.
3. Vaginal cancer
The treatment of vaginal cancer should follow the principle of
individualization, and the plan should be formulated according to
the patient's age, disease stage and lesion location.
:
Early vaginal cancer (VaIN): Observation or topical drug therapy
can reduce the risk of developing invasive cancer
.
Intermediate and advanced vaginal cancer: radiotherapy is the first
choice, including intracavitary and external irradiation.
.
Elderly or asexual people: surgical treatment is an option
.
4. Ovarian cancer
The treatment of ovarian cancer is mainly divided into
postoperative initial chemotherapy and late treatment:
Postoperative initial chemotherapy: The preferred option is
intravenous TC regimen (paclitaxel + carboplatin), 6 courses, which
is the standard chemotherapy regimen for advanced epithelial
ovarian cancer.
.
Other alternatives: Carboplatin + docetaxel is equally effective as
the TC regimen and is suitable for patients with potential nerve
damage such as diabetes.
.
Summarize
The choice of the most appropriate gynecological cancer treatment
depends on the patient's specific condition and the outcome of a
multidisciplinary discussion. For different types of gynecological
cancers, such as endometrial cancer, cervical cancer and vaginal
cancer, the treatment methods have different focuses, but they all
emphasize the importance of individualized treatment.
For more photos and details please contact me:
Company Name: Tonglu Wanhe Medical Instruments Co., Ltd.
Sales: Sue