Literature DB >> 27769526

Minimally invasive versus standard laparotomic interval debulking surgery in ovarian neoplasm: A single-institution retrospective case-control study.

S Gueli Alletti1, M Petrillo2, G Vizzielli3, C Bottoni3, F Nardelli4, B Costantini3, L Quagliozzi3, V Gallotta3, G Scambia5, A Fagotti4.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To further investigate the role of MIS comparing patients submitted to MI-IDS with a balanced population treated by standard laparotomy.
METHODS: The investigational arm (Cases) includes 30 AEOC patients treated with MI-IDS. The Control arm included a consecutive series of 65 AEOC patients submitted to laparotomic IDS. Inclusion criteria were: age>18years, histologically proven EOC, clinical complete/partial response after NACT, and ECOG PS <2. Preoperative clinical data, perioperative and oncological outcomes were analyzed. General Well-Being Schedule (GWBS) was administered to evaluate quality of life before and after surgery.
RESULTS: Both groups were well-balanced. A higher percentage of women among Cases received bevacizumab-containing NACT compared with Controls. No statistical differences were registered in terms of surgical procedures and residual tumor. A significantly longer median OT in Cases was counterbalanced by more favorable EBL and median length of stay and TTC. No statistically significant differences were registered in terms of postoperative complications. Cases showed a 6months longer PFS compared to Controls. However, in multivariate analysis only the administration of Bevacizumab and a shorter TTC were independently associated with a longer PFS. Regarding QoL, no statistically significant differences were registered in Cases between pre- and postoperative GWBS score. Differently from Controls where this difference was statistically significant and a more intense distress were recorded.
CONCLUSIONS: Minimally invasive approach could represent an advantageous alternative surgical way to perform interval debulking surgery in this specific subset of patients, with no impact on PFS. Based on these findings a randomized clinical trial is now under evaluation in our Institution.
Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Interval debulking surgery; Laparoscopy; Minimally invasive; Ovarian cancer

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27769526     DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2016.10.017

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Gynecol Oncol        ISSN: 0090-8258            Impact factor:   5.482


  10 in total

1.  Laparoscopic cytoreductive surgery and HIPEC: a comparative matched analysis.

Authors:  L Rodríguez-Ortiz; A Arjona-Sánchez; M Ibañez-Rubio; J Sánchez-Hidalgo; A Casado-Adam; S Rufián-Peña; J Briceño-Delgado
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2020-04-23       Impact factor: 4.584

2.  Primary Laparoscopic Surgery Does Not Affect the Prognosis of Early-Stage Ovarian Clear Cell Cancer.

Authors:  Sheng Yin; Wen Gao; Peipei Shi; Meili Xi; Wenbin Tang; Jiarong Zhang
Journal:  Cancer Manag Res       Date:  2021-08-14       Impact factor: 3.989

3.  Minimally invasive interval cytoreductive surgery in ovarian cancer: systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Joel Cardenas-Goicoechea; Yu Wang; Susan McGorray; Mohammed D Saleem; Semiramis L Carbajal Mamani; Ariel F Pomputius; Merry-Jennifer Markham; Jacqueline C Castagno
Journal:  J Robot Surg       Date:  2018-07-10

4.  Clinical Availability of Tumour Biopsy Using Diagnostic Laparoscopy for Advanced Ovarian Cancer.

Authors:  Suguru Odajima; Kazu Ueda; Satoshi Hosoya; Keisuke Tomita; Sayako Kato; Yuichi Shoburu; Ayako Kawabata; Yasushi Iida; Nozomu Yanaihara; Aikou Okamoto
Journal:  In Vivo       Date:  2021 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 2.155

5.  Prognostic impact of adjuvant chemotherapy treatment intensity for ovarian cancer.

Authors:  Kristen D Starbuck; J Brian Szender; William D Duncan; Kayla Morrell; John Lewis Etter; Emese Zsiros; Kunle Odunsi; Kirsten Moysich; Kevin H Eng
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-11-12       Impact factor: 3.752

6.  Perioperative and Survival Outcomes of Robotic-Assisted Surgery, Comparison with Laparoscopy and Laparotomy, for Ovarian Cancer: A Network Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Qin Tang; Weichu Liu; Dan Jiang; Junying Tang; Qin Zhou; Jing Zhang
Journal:  J Oncol       Date:  2022-04-30       Impact factor: 4.501

7.  Efficacy and Safety of Minimally Invasive Surgery Versus Open Laparotomy for Interval Debulking Surgery of Advanced Ovarian Cancer After Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy: A Systematic Review and A Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Siyuan Zeng; Yongai Yu; Yuemei Cui; Bing Liu; Xianyu Jin; Zhengyan Li; Lifeng Liu
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2022-07-18       Impact factor: 5.738

8.  Does MIS Play a Role in the Treatment of Advanced Ovarian Cancer?

Authors:  Augusto Pereira; Javier F Magrina; Paul M Magtibay; Joao Siufi Neto; Daniela F S Siufi; Yu-Hui H Chang; Tirso Perez-Medina
Journal:  Cancers (Basel)       Date:  2022-07-22       Impact factor: 6.575

9.  The Role of Minimally Invasive Surgery in the Care of Women with Ovarian Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Authors:  Anne Knisely; Charlotte R Gamble; Caryn M St Clair; June Y Hou; Fady Khoury-Collado; Allison A Gockley; Jason D Wright; Alexander Melamed
Journal:  J Minim Invasive Gynecol       Date:  2020-11-14       Impact factor: 4.314

10.  Ovarian cancer surgery in Germany: An analysis of the nationwide hospital file 2005-2015.

Authors:  Pietro Trocchi; Pawel Mach; Karl Rainer Kimmig; Andreas Stang
Journal:  Womens Health (Lond)       Date:  2022 Jan-Dec
  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.