Following two studies recently published in The New England Journal of Medicine, it is becoming increasingly difficult to find medical centers that will employ minimally-invasive laparoscopic surgical techniques for treatment of cervical cancer.

According to the Houston Chronicle, the data revealed that using this method for treatment of cervical cancer increases the chance that a woman so diagnosed will not live to survive the five-year mark. The medical facility that spearheaded the studies—MD Anderson Cancer Center—no longer offers anything but full incision hysterectomies as an option for the treatment of cervical cancer.

It is expected that more medical centers that still offer the minimally invasive technique with or without robotic assistance will stop offering that option in coming months in response to the research.

What is Laparoscopic vs. Open Hysterectomy?

When discussing options with an oncologist for the treatment of cervical cancer, a lot depends upon the stage at which the disease is discovered. It is common practice to treat early stage cervical cancer with radical hysterectomy regardless of the surgical method.

Radical hysterectomy involves the removal of the uterus, cervix, upper part of the vagina, and nearby lymph tissue which might be affected. Later stage cervical cancer is more commonly treated with chemotherapy and radiation.

According to NBC News, laparoscopic hysterectomy was believed to be better for the patient because there was less hemorrhaging, less incidence of infection, and shorter hospital stays.

Also known as keyhole surgery, this treatment of cervical cancer leads to less visible scarring. It is done by making a small incision in the abdominal wall and using cameras and endoscopes. For all of the theoretical benefits, this surgical method has been largely adopted in the U.S. over at least the last ten years. However, laparoscopy is not foolproof – 2014 saw many robotic surgery lawsuits over the da Vinci Surgical System.

Open radical hysterectomy involves a larger cut in the abdominal wall, lengthier hospital stays, and significantly greater recovery times.

Interestingly, the open hysterectomy procedure has been associated through this study with a surprisingly greater chance of survival, and laparoscopic procedures with the cancer returning. The why behind this counter-intuitive finding has confounded the researchers and will remain elusive until more research in completed.

The Nature of the Studies

One of the Houston studies was unique in that it didn’t focus on immediate short-term functional living gains but on five-year survival rates. It randomly enrolled 631 early stage cervical cancer patients in 33 different cancer treatment centers globally and assigned them either to receive open radical or laparoscopic radical hysterectomies.

Of those women that has laparoscopic treatment of cervical cancer, 86 percent were alive four years later. This compared to 96.5 percent of women that had the open radical hysterectomy—a near 10 percent difference.

In another study undertaken by the same researchers, a quarter of a million cervical cancer patients in a cancer database were analyzed by surgical technique and survival rate over a three-year period.

Fifty percent had open surgeries and 50 percent had laparoscopic surgeries. At the four year post-surgical mark, nine percent had succumbed the disease after a minimally-invasive technique was used and only five percent passed away after the open surgery.

Join a Free Cervical Cancer after Hysterectomy Lawsuit Investigation

If your cervical cancer progressed after laparoscopic radical hysterectomy, or if your loved one died after such surgery, you may have a legal claim. See if you qualify to file a cervical cancer after hysterectomy lawsuit by filling out the form on this page now.

Learn More