OBJECTIVE: To review the experimental studies on laparoscopy and cancer and to propose guidelines for the clinical management of gynecologic cancer. METHODS: The literature in MEDLINE was searched from January 1992 to December 1998 using the terms 'cancer', 'laparoscopy' and 'experimental or animal study'. Cross-referencing identified additional publications. Abstracts and letters to the editor were excluded. All the relevant papers were reviewed. RESULTS: Depending on the model used, controversial results have been reported on the incidence of trocar site metastasis when comparing CO(2) laparoscopy and laparotomy. In contrast, the following conclusions can be proposed: (i) tumour growth after laparotomy is greater than after endoscopy; (ii) tumour dissemination is worse after CO(2) laparoscopy than after laparotomy; (iii) some of the disadvantages of CO(2) laparoscopy may be treated using local or intravenous treatments or avoided using other endoscopic exposure methods, such as gasless laparoscopy. CONCLUSIONS: The laparoscopic treatment of gynecologic cancer has potential advantages and disadvantages, and may only be performed in prospective clinical trials. The risk of dissemination appears high when a large number of malignant cells are present. Adnexal tumours with external vegetations, and bulky lymph nodes should be considered as contra-indications to CO(2) laparoscopy.
OBJECTIVE: To review the experimental studies on laparoscopy and cancer and to propose guidelines for the clinical management of gynecologic cancer. METHODS: The literature in MEDLINE was searched from January 1992 to December 1998 using the terms 'cancer', 'laparoscopy' and 'experimental or animal study'. Cross-referencing identified additional publications. Abstracts and letters to the editor were excluded. All the relevant papers were reviewed. RESULTS: Depending on the model used, controversial results have been reported on the incidence of trocar site metastasis when comparing CO(2) laparoscopy and laparotomy. In contrast, the following conclusions can be proposed: (i) tumour growth after laparotomy is greater than after endoscopy; (ii) tumour dissemination is worse after CO(2) laparoscopy than after laparotomy; (iii) some of the disadvantages of CO(2) laparoscopy may be treated using local or intravenous treatments or avoided using other endoscopic exposure methods, such as gasless laparoscopy. CONCLUSIONS: The laparoscopic treatment of gynecologic cancer has potential advantages and disadvantages, and may only be performed in prospective clinical trials. The risk of dissemination appears high when a large number of malignant cells are present. Adnexal tumours with external vegetations, and bulky lymph nodes should be considered as contra-indications to CO(2) laparoscopy.
Authors: Walter J A Brokelman; Lena Holmdahl; Maria Bergström; Peter Falk; Jean H G Klinkenbijl; Jean H G Klinkonbijl; Michel M P J Reijnen; Michael M P J Reijnen Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2007-03-01 Impact factor: 4.584