For a study, researchers sought to compare the effects of abdominal nerve-sparing radical hysterectomy (ARH) and laparoscopic nerve-sparing radical hysterectomy (LRH) after a step-by-step operation on urodynamic outcomes in patients with uterine cervical carcinoma.

About 76 cervical cancer patients were recruited in the retrospective analysis; 35 were in the LRH group, and 41 were in the ARH group. In urodynamics research, they evaluated their postoperative bladder function, and using S-100 antibody staining; we measured the number of pelvic nerves that had been removed from parametrial sections.

Estimated blood loss and length of stay in the hospital following surgery were considerably lower in the LRH group than in the ARH group (P<0.0001). Additionally, there were substantially more extracted lymph nodes in the LRH group (P=0.044). In the study, there was no distinction in perioperative problems between the two groups. The LRH group’s 5-year disease-free survival and overall survival rates were 91.2% and 94.0%, respectively, whereas the ARH group’s rates were 87.8% and 95.1%. The recovery of postoperative bladder function (uroflowmetry) in the LRH group quickly returned to presurgery levels at 1 month, and the LRH group had a smaller number of s-100 antibody-stained nerves contained the parametrial sections, despite the median residual urine volume showing no statistically significant differences between the LRH group and the ARH group.

They showed that LRH might accomplish a better avoidance of injury to the pelvic splanchnic nerve plexus bladder branch and hence more quickly recover bladder function.