Two pillars in modern oncology are treatment personalization and the reduction in treatment-related morbidity. For decades, the one-fits-all concept of radical hysterectomy has been the cornerstone of early-stage cervical cancer surgical treatment. However, no agreement exists about the prevalent method of parametrial invasion, and the literature is conflicting regarding the extent of parametrectomy needed to achieve adequate surgical radicality. Therefore, authors started investigating if less radical surgery was feasible and oncologically safe in these patients. Two historical randomized controlled trials (RCTs) compared classical radical hysterectomy (RH) to modified RH and simple hysterectomy. Less radical surgery showed a drastic reduction in morbidity without jeopardizing oncological outcomes. However, given the high frequency of adjuvant radiotherapy, the real impact of reduced radicality could not be estimated. Subsequently, several retrospective studies investigated the chance of tailoring parametrectomy according to the tumor’s characteristics. Parametrial involvement was shown to be negligible in early-stage low-risk cervical cancer. An observational prospective study and a phase II exploratory RCT have recently confirmed the feasibility and safety of simple hysterectomy in this subgroup of patients. The preliminary results of a large prospective RCT comparing simple vs. radical surgery for early-stage low-risk cervical cancer show strong probability of giving a final answer on this topic.

The implementation of sentinel lymph node (SLN) biopsy is changing the scenario in the surgical treatment of early-stage cervical cancer, and the oncologic safety of replacing bilateral pelvic lymphadenectomy with SLN biopsy is currently under investigation. Part of the undisputed value of SLN biopsy is its diagnostic accuracy in detecting low-volume metastases (LVM) via pathologic ultrastaging. In early-stage cervical cancer, the reported incidence of LVM ranges from 4 to 20%. The prognostic impact and the role of adjuvant treatment in patients with LVM is still unclear. Some non-prespecified analyses in prospective studies showed no impact on the oncologic outcomes compared to node-negative disease. However, the heterogeneity of the studies, the differences in the disease stage and the use of adjuvant treatment, and the concomitant pelvic lymphadenectomy (PLND) make reaching any conclusions on this topic hard. Current guidelines suggest considering micrometastases (MIC) as a node-positive disease, while considering isolated tumor cells (ITC) as a node-negative disease with a low level of evidence. This review aims to highlight the unanswered questions about the definition, identification, and prognostic and therapeutic roles of LVM and to underline the present and future challenges we are facing. We hope that this review will guide further research, giving robust evidence on LVM and their impacts on clinical practice.

The implementation of sentinel lymph node (SLN) biopsy is changing the scenario in the surgical treatment of early-stage cervical cancer and the oncologic safety of replacing bilateral pelvic lymphadenectomy with SLN biopsy is currently under investigation. One of the undisputed values of SLN biopsy is its diagnostic accuracy in detecting low-volume metastases (LVM) via pathologic ultrastaging. In early-stage cervical cancer, the reported incidence of LVM ranges from 4 to 20%. The prognostic impact and the role of adjuvant treatment in patients with LVM is still unclear. Some non-prespecified analyses in prospective studies showed no impact on the oncologic outcomes compared to node-negative disease. However, the heterogeneity of the studies, the differences in the disease stage and the use of adjuvant treatment, and the concomitant pelvic lymphadenectomy (PLND) make any conclusion on this topic hard. Current guidelines suggest considering micrometastasis (MIC) as a node-positive disease, while isolated tumor cells (ITC) as a node-negative disease, with a low level of evidence. This review aims to highlight the unanswered questions about the definition, identification, prognostic and therapeutic role of LVM and underline the present and future challenges we are facing. We hope this review will guide further research, giving robust evidence on LVM and their impact on clinical practice.