Uccella Stefano, Franchi Massimo P, Cianci Stefano, Zorzato Pier Carlo, Bertoli Francesca, Alletti Salvatore Gueli, Ghezzi Fabio, Scambia Giovanni
Division of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Department of Maternal, Neonatal and Infant Health, ASL Biella, Italy.
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Verona, Verona, Italy.
Gland Surg. 2020 Aug;9(4):1130-1139. doi: 10.21037/gs-20-353.
The objective of the present review is to thoroughly investigate the role of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) in the setting of secondary cytoreduction for ovarian cancer recurrence, comparing this approach to traditional open surgery. PubMed, ClinicalTrials.gov, Scopus and Web of Science databases (between 1st January 1989 and 1st January 2020), have been systematically queried to identify all articles reporting either laparoscopic or robotic-assisted secondary surgical cytoreduction for recurrent ovarian cancer. We also manually searched the reference lists of the identified studies. Only English language papers were considered. Two independent reviewers screened and identified the reports. A sub-analysis was performed including studies comparing MIS open abdominal secondary cytoreduction. A total of 617 articles were considered. Among them, we included 12 retrospective studies on minimally invasive secondary cytoreduction, enrolling 372 patients (260 of whom were submitted to whether robotics or laparosopy). Three studies compared 69 patients who underwent MIS 112 cases of open abdominal secondary cytoreduction. Other 9 articles described a total of 191 patients who had minimally invasive secondary cytoreduction for recurrent ovarian cancer without a comparative arm. The quality of the evidence was low. The decision regarding the use of MIS was left to surgeon's discretion; in general, the candidates to MIS were selected patients with single-site disease or few localizations of relapse. Compared to open surgery, MIS was associated with significantly lower blood loss, shorter hospital stay and less postoperative complications; the rate of complete cytoreduction to residual tumor =0 was 95.5% in MIS cases 87.5% in laparotomy cases. The risk of complications was generally low. Disease-free and overall survival were comparable between groups. There is no consensus on the criteria to select patients for laparoscopic or robotic secondary cytoreduction. Intra-operative ultrasound has been proposed as a possible tool to better identify the site of recurrence and for confirmation of complete resection of disease. In conclusion, MIS is an option in selected patients with recurrent ovarian cancer, provided there is no widespread disease. Selection of patients appears of utmost importance to obtain satisfactory survival outcomes.
本综述的目的是全面研究微创手术(MIS)在卵巢癌复发二次减瘤手术中的作用,并将这种方法与传统开放手术进行比较。我们系统检索了PubMed、ClinicalTrials.gov、Scopus和Web of Science数据库(1989年1月1日至2020年1月1日),以识别所有报告腹腔镜或机器人辅助复发性卵巢癌二次手术减瘤的文章。我们还手动检索了已识别研究的参考文献列表。仅纳入英文论文。两名独立评审员筛选并确定报告。进行了一项亚分析,纳入比较MIS与开放性腹部二次减瘤的研究。共检索到617篇文章。其中,我们纳入了12项关于微创二次减瘤的回顾性研究,纳入372例患者(其中260例接受了机器人手术或腹腔镜手术)。三项研究比较了69例接受MIS的患者与112例开放性腹部二次减瘤的病例。其他9篇文章共描述了191例接受复发性卵巢癌微创二次减瘤的患者,但没有比较组。证据质量较低。关于是否使用MIS的决定由外科医生自行决定;一般来说,MIS的候选患者是选择的单部位疾病或复发部位较少的患者。与开放手术相比,MIS的失血量显著减少、住院时间缩短且术后并发症更少;MIS组肿瘤完全减瘤至残留肿瘤=0的比例为95.5%,开腹手术组为87.5%。并发症风险一般较低。两组之间的无病生存期和总生存期相当。对于选择腹腔镜或机器人辅助二次减瘤的患者标准尚无共识。术中超声已被提议作为一种可能的工具,以更好地识别复发部位并确认疾病的完全切除。总之,对于没有广泛疾病的复发性卵巢癌患者,MIS是一种选择。患者的选择对于获得满意的生存结果似乎至关重要。