Iatrogenic transtubal spill of endometrial cancer: risk or myth.

INTRODUCTION: Although intrauterine procedures are essential for endometrial evaluation in many cases, the significance of the amount of tumor cell dissemination during these procedures, the viability and invasive potential of the endometrial cancer (EC) cells, and their impact on prognosis remain elusive.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: An extensive search was performed in the Cochrane Central Trials Registry, the Web of Science, and PubMed for publications about the role of hysteroscopy (H/S), saline infusion sonography (SIS) and laparoscopy (L/S) in dissemination of EC cells and prognostic significance of positive peritoneal washings (PPW), between 1988 and 2010 and English language. All eligible trials were included.
CONCLUSION: PPW rates vary between 0-14% after dilatation and curettage (D&C), 0-83% after H/S, 0-10% after L/S and 12-52% after SIS. The majority of the studies about EC cell dissemination during H/S and SIS suggest that they increase the risk of spill. There is not enough evidence to support the association between tumor spill and pressure, type and volume of distension medium, duration of the procedure, stage, grade and interval between H/S or SIS and laparotomy. Investigation into the rate of spill of EC cells during laparoscopic surgery is in the early stages and not yet definitive. There are too few in vivo and in vitro studies to comment definitively on the viability of the disseminated EC cells. The limited data we do have, however, questions the ability of disseminated EC cells to maintain and grow. Most published studies support the idea that prognosis is not affected by PPW in stage I EC. The changes in FIGO 2009 staging of EC appears to have merit when considering the sum of the data. H/S and SIS probably increase the risk of spill, however this increase does not seem effect prognosis. Although peritoneal washings are still expected to be performed, PPW itself does not necessitate additional treatment.