Gizzo Salvatore, Patrelli Tito Silvio, Dall'asta Andrea, DI Gangi Stefania, Giordano Giovanna, Migliavacca Costanza, Monica Michela, Merisio Carla, Nardelli Giovanni Battista, Quaranta Michela, Noventa Marco, Berretta Roberto
Department of Women's and Children's Health, Complex Operative Unit of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University of Padua, Padua 35128, Italy.
Department of Surgical Sciences, Complex Operative Unit of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University of Parma, Parma 43125, Italy.
Oncol Lett. 2016 Feb;11(2):1213-1219. doi: 10.3892/ol.2015.4032. Epub 2015 Dec 15.
The aim of the current study was to diagnose the concomitant presence of adenomyosis (AM) in endometrioid endometrial cancer (EEC) in order to evaluate its value as an oncological prognostic marker. A retrospective analysis of 289 patients diagnosed with EEC who underwent total hysterectomy, bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy and pelvic-lymphadenectomy was conducted. The total cohort included 37 patients in Group A (those with concomitant AM and EEC) and 252 patients in Group B (those affected only by EEC). The following factors were evaluated: Presence or absence of AM, tumor grade, depth of myometrial invasion, tumor size, lymphovascular space involvement, lymph node status, peritoneal cytology, concomitant detection of endometrial atypical-hyperplasia or polypoid endometrial features and tumor stage according to the International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) classification. Uterine examination of different sections of uterine cervix, corpus, myomas and cervical or endometrial polyps was performed. The diagnosis of AM was confirmed when the distance between the lower border of the endometrium and the foci of the endometrial glands and stroma was >2.5 mm. Parametric and nonparametric statistical tests were performed when possible; continuous variables were analyzed using a Student's t-test, and categorical variables were analyzed by the χ test or Fisher's exact test. The association between FIGO stage and group was determined to be significant: 83.8% of Group A patients were categorized as FIGO stage I, vs. 68.7% of Group B patients. In addition, Group A was associated with lower grades in FIGO stage, myometrial invasion, lymphovascular space involvement, lymph node involvement and tumor size. The findings suggest that the intraoperative evaluation of the presence of AM in patients with EEC may aid surgeons in estimating oncological risk and in selecting the most appropriate surgical treatment.
本研究的目的是诊断子宫内膜样腺癌(EEC)中是否同时存在子宫腺肌病(AM),以评估其作为肿瘤预后标志物的价值。对289例诊断为EEC并接受全子宫切除术、双侧输卵管卵巢切除术和盆腔淋巴结清扫术的患者进行了回顾性分析。整个队列包括A组的37例患者(同时患有AM和EEC)和B组的252例患者(仅受EEC影响)。评估了以下因素:AM的有无、肿瘤分级、肌层浸润深度、肿瘤大小、淋巴管间隙受累情况、淋巴结状态、腹腔细胞学检查、子宫内膜非典型增生或息肉样子宫内膜特征的同时检测以及根据国际妇产科联合会(FIGO)分类的肿瘤分期。对子宫颈、子宫体、肌瘤以及宫颈或子宫内膜息肉的不同部位进行了子宫检查。当子宫内膜下缘与子宫内膜腺体和间质病灶之间的距离>2.5 mm时,AM的诊断得以证实。尽可能进行了参数和非参数统计检验;连续变量采用Student t检验进行分析,分类变量采用χ检验或Fisher精确检验进行分析。FIGO分期与组别之间的关联具有显著性:A组83.8%的患者被归类为FIGO I期,而B组为68.7%。此外,A组在FIGO分期、肌层浸润、淋巴管间隙受累、淋巴结受累和肿瘤大小方面的分级较低。研究结果表明,在EEC患者中术中评估AM的存在可能有助于外科医生评估肿瘤风险并选择最合适的手术治疗方法。