Ødegaard Elin, Staff Anne Cathrine, Langebrekke Anton, Engh Vibeke, Onsrud Mathias
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Ullevål University Hospital, Oslo, Norway.
Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2007;86(5):620-6. doi: 10.1080/00016340701286934.
Laparoscopic management of borderline ovarian tumors is controversial.
To retrospectively compare outcome after surgery by laparoscopy or laparotomy for borderline tumors.
Ovarian tumors from all women operated at Ullevål University Hospital during a five-year period were re-evaluated histologically. Patients with borderline FIGO (International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics) stage I tumors were retrospectively compared regarding surgery outcome following laparoscopy or laparotomy.
Histological re-evaluation revealed only 3 misclassifications in 608 patients. Borderline tumors represented 36% of epithelial ovarian malignancies. The 107 borderline stage I included 52 serous, 53 mucinous, and 2 endometrioid tumors. Thirty-eight patients were operated on primarily by laparoscopy and 69 by laparotomy (including 14 women starting with laparoscopy). In the laparoscopy group, more women were premenopausal (63% versus 35%, p=0.01) and median tumor diameter was smaller (8.6 versus 16.4 cm, p<0.001) as compared to the laparotomy group. When tumor diameter exceeded 10 cm, intraoperative tumor rupture was significantly more frequent during laparoscopy than during laparotomy (p=0.01). Less postoperative complications were seen after laparoscopic operations (p=0.034), but laparoscopic surgeries were less extensive, without hysterectomy, as compared to laparotomy. During the 14-78 months follow-up time, no relapse occurred in either group. After fertility-sparing surgery, there was no statistical significant difference regarding successful pregnancies between the two groups.
Laparoscopic treatment of borderline ovarian tumors is feasible if tumor is of moderate size (diameter below 10 cm), gives fewer complications, and shorter hospital stay. Long-term follow-up of larger materials is needed to determine the ultimate recurrence risk as well as fertility rates.
腹腔镜治疗卵巢交界性肿瘤存在争议。
回顾性比较腹腔镜手术与开腹手术治疗交界性肿瘤的术后结局。
对在乌勒瓦尔大学医院接受手术的所有女性患者的卵巢肿瘤进行了为期五年的组织学重新评估。对国际妇产科联盟(FIGO)I期交界性肿瘤患者,回顾性比较腹腔镜手术与开腹手术的手术结局。
组织学重新评估显示,608例患者中仅3例分类错误。交界性肿瘤占上皮性卵巢恶性肿瘤的36%。107例I期交界性肿瘤包括52例浆液性、53例黏液性和2例子宫内膜样肿瘤。38例患者主要接受腹腔镜手术,69例接受开腹手术(包括14例先进行腹腔镜手术的女性)。与开腹手术组相比,腹腔镜手术组绝经前女性更多(63%对35%,p=0.01),肿瘤中位直径更小(8.6对16.4 cm,p<0.001)。当肿瘤直径超过10 cm时,腹腔镜手术中肿瘤破裂的发生率显著高于开腹手术(p=0.01)。腹腔镜手术后的术后并发症较少(p=0.034),但与开腹手术相比,腹腔镜手术范围较小,未行子宫切除术。在14 - 78个月的随访期内,两组均未复发。保留生育功能手术后,两组在成功妊娠方面无统计学显著差异。
如果肿瘤大小适中(直径小于10 cm),腹腔镜治疗卵巢交界性肿瘤是可行的,并发症较少,住院时间较短。需要对更多病例进行长期随访,以确定最终的复发风险和生育率。