Cianci Stefano, Capozzi Vito Andrea, Rosati Andrea, Rumolo Valerio, Corrado Giacomo, Uccella Stefano, Gueli Alletti Salvatore, Riccò Matteo, Fagotti Anna, Scambia Giovanni, Cosentino Francesco
Unit of Gynecology, Department of Human Pathology of Adult and Childood 'G. Barresi', University of Messina, Messina, Italy.
Department of Medicine and Surgery, University Hospital of Parma, Parma, Italy.
Front Med (Lausanne). 2022 Apr 25;9:880681. doi: 10.3389/fmed.2022.880681. eCollection 2022.
Ovarian cancer is the third most frequent gynecological cancer. In early stage ovarian cancer (ESOC) comprehensive surgical staging is recommended. Surgical staging is traditionally approached by laparotomy, although minimally invasive surgery can be a valid alternative in selected patients. This study aims to analyze the surgical and oncological outcomes of three different surgical approaches in a large series of patients.
We retrospectively included all histologically proven ESOC cases treated between January 2014 and December 2017. ESOC was defined as stage IA to IIB according to the 2018 FIGO staging system. Subjects were divided into groups 1, 2, and 3, based on the surgical approach (open abdominal, laparoscopic, or robotic, respectively).
Within patients enrolled during the study period, 455 met the inclusion criteria. No difference in intraoperative complications was recorded in the three groups ( = 0.709). Conversely, a significant difference occurred in postoperative complications (16.2 vs. 3.8 vs. 11.1%, in groups 1, 2, and 3 respectively, = 0.004). No difference was found in overall survival (OS) (32 vs. 31 vs. 25 months, = 0.481) and disease-free survival (DFS) (26 vs. 29 vs. 24 months, = 0.178) in groups 1, 2, and 3, respectively. At univariate analysis FIGO stage I ( = 0.004) showed a lower recurrence rate compared to FIGO stage II.
No significant difference was found in OS and DFS among the three groups (open, laparoscopic, and robotic). The minimally invasive approach showed lower rate of complications than the laparotomic approach.
卵巢癌是第三常见的妇科癌症。对于早期卵巢癌(ESOC),建议进行全面的手术分期。传统上,手术分期通过剖腹手术进行,尽管微创手术在特定患者中也可作为一种有效的替代方法。本研究旨在分析一大系列患者中三种不同手术方法的手术和肿瘤学结局。
我们回顾性纳入了2014年1月至2017年12月期间所有经组织学证实的ESOC病例。根据2018年FIGO分期系统,ESOC被定义为IA期至IIB期。根据手术方法(分别为开腹、腹腔镜或机器人手术),将受试者分为1、2、3组。
在研究期间纳入的患者中,455例符合纳入标准。三组术中并发症无差异(=0.709)。相反,术后并发症有显著差异(1组、2组和3组分别为16.2%、3.8%和11.1%,=0.004)。1组、2组和3组的总生存期(OS)(分别为32个月、31个月和25个月,=0.481)和无病生存期(DFS)(分别为26个月、29个月和24个月,=0.178)无差异。单因素分析显示,FIGO I期(=0.004)的复发率低于FIGO II期。
三组(开腹、腹腔镜和机器人手术)的OS和DFS无显著差异。微创方法的并发症发生率低于剖腹手术方法。