Kim Myeong-Seon, Lee Yoo-Young, Park Soo Jin, Kim Hee Seung, Yoo Heon Jong, Lim Myong Cheol, Song Yong Jung, Lee Eun-Ju
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Chung-Ang University Gwangmyeong Hospital, Chung-Ang University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
Gynecologic Oncology Cancer Center, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
J Gynecol Oncol. 2025 May;36(3):e39. doi: 10.3802/jgo.2025.36.e39. Epub 2024 Oct 22.
Because of the possible therapeutic benefit of removing occult tumor cells, a source of recurrence and chemoresistance, total parietal peritonectomy (TPP) is an alternative treatment for advanced epithelial ovarian/fallopian tube/primary peritoneal cancer. Interventional studies comparing TPP with selective parietal peritonectomy (SPP) are in progress. Since surgeons skilled in TPP are essential for such trials to be conducted, this nationwide survey aimed to examine current peritonectomy practice among gynecologic oncologists in Korea.
A 17-item questionnaire, developed by a surgery committee and reviewed by the scientific review board of the Korean Gynecology Oncology Group (KGOG), was distributed to 144 KGOG members. The questionnaire was divided into 3 categories: respondent demographics, peritonectomy practice during primary debulking surgery (PDS), and peritonectomy practice during interval debulking surgery (IDS).
We received 88 (61.1%) valid responses. Of the valid respondents, 98.9% and 93.8% performed SPP during PDS and IDS, respectively. Only 4.9% of the respondents performed TPP during IDS. Most respondents performed peritonectomy in cases where optimal postoperative outcomes were expected. Approximately 50.6% of the respondents had performed peritonectomy independently, while the others did so in cooperation with non-gynecologic surgeons. The primary reasons for not performing TPP were concerns about morbidity and uncertainty about the clinical benefits of the procedure.
SPP is the predominant technique used in both PDS and IDS in Korea. A small percentage (4.9%) of gynecologic oncologists have performed TPP during IDS. Accordingly, a study regarding the feasibility of TPP should be conducted before proceeding with a prospective clinical trial.
由于清除隐匿性肿瘤细胞（复发和化疗耐药的根源）可能具有治疗益处，全腹膜切除术（TPP）是晚期上皮性卵巢癌/输卵管癌/原发性腹膜癌的一种替代治疗方法。比较TPP与选择性腹膜切除术（SPP）的干预性研究正在进行中。由于熟练掌握TPP的外科医生对于开展此类试验至关重要，这项全国性调查旨在考察韩国妇科肿瘤学家目前的腹膜切除术实践情况。
一份由外科委员会制定并经韩国妇科肿瘤学组（KGOG）科学审查委员会审核的包含17个条目的问卷，被分发给144名KGOG成员。问卷分为3类：受访者人口统计学信息、初次肿瘤细胞减灭术（PDS）期间的腹膜切除术实践，以及中间性肿瘤细胞减灭术（IDS）期间的腹膜切除术实践。
我们收到了88份（61.1%）有效回复。在有效受访者中，分别有98.9%和93.8%的人在PDS和IDS期间进行了SPP。只有4.9%的受访者在IDS期间进行了TPP。大多数受访者在预期术后效果最佳的情况下进行腹膜切除术。约50.6%的受访者独立进行腹膜切除术，而其他人则与非妇科外科医生合作进行。不进行TPP的主要原因是担心发病率以及该手术临床益处的不确定性。
SPP是韩国PDS和IDS中使用的主要技术。一小部分（4.9%）妇科肿瘤学家在IDS期间进行了TPP。因此，在进行前瞻性临床试验之前，应开展一项关于TPP可行性的研究。
