Gery Lamblin1, Capucine Meysonnier1, Stéphanie Moret1, Béatrice Nadaud2, Georges Mellier1, Gautier Chene3,4. 1. Department Gynecology, Hôpital Femme Mère Enfant, HFME, Lyon CHU, Lyon, France. 2. Department of Pathology, Centre Hospitalier Est, Lyon CHU, Lyon, France. 3. Department Gynecology, Hôpital Femme Mère Enfant, HFME, Lyon CHU, Lyon, France. chenegautier@yahoo.fr. 4. Université Claude Bernard Lyon 1, EMR 3738, 69000, Lyon, France. chenegautier@yahoo.fr.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: The objective was to evaluate the surgical feasibility of opportunistic salpingectomy or salpingo-oophorectomy during benign vaginal hysterectomy (HV) and the prevalence of occult tubal lesions. METHODS: In this prospective study from 1 September 2013 to 1 November 2015, the prevalence of bilateral salpingectomy with or without ovariectomy and the prevalence of histopathological and immunohistochemical tubal abnormalities were assessed. RESULTS: A total 115 patients were included. Bilateral salpingectomy was performed in 85 patients (73.92%; group A) and was technically impossible in 30 patients (26.08%; group B). Older patients (62.9 vs 57.5 years, p = 0.009), menopausal status (83.33% vs 62.35%, p = 0.03) and elevated BMI (27.58 vs 25.05 p = 0.03) were statistically associated with failure of salpingectomy. There was only one case of postoperative hemorrhage in group A. There was no difference with regard to intra- or postoperative complications, blood loss, and operating time between the two groups. Among the 67 fallopian tubes analyzed with a validated histopathological protocol, there were 8 (11.94%) immunohistochemical abnormalities with a "p53 signature." CONCLUSIONS: With the recent demonstration of a tubal origin of most ovarian cancer, opportunistic salpingectomy could be a theoretically relevant prevention strategy. Bilateral salpingectomy could be performed during benign vaginal hysterectomy by experienced surgeons. The advantages and disadvantages of exclusive salpingectomy during pelvic floor surgery should be discussed with the patients.
INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: The objective was to evaluate the surgical feasibility of opportunistic salpingectomy or salpingo-oophorectomy during benign vaginal hysterectomy (HV) and the prevalence of occult tubal lesions. METHODS: In this prospective study from 1 September 2013 to 1 November 2015, the prevalence of bilateral salpingectomy with or without ovariectomy and the prevalence of histopathological and immunohistochemical tubal abnormalities were assessed. RESULTS: A total 115 patients were included. Bilateral salpingectomy was performed in 85 patients (73.92%; group A) and was technically impossible in 30 patients (26.08%; group B). Older patients (62.9 vs 57.5 years, p = 0.009), menopausal status (83.33% vs 62.35%, p = 0.03) and elevated BMI (27.58 vs 25.05 p = 0.03) were statistically associated with failure of salpingectomy. There was only one case of postoperative hemorrhage in group A. There was no difference with regard to intra- or postoperative complications, blood loss, and operating time between the two groups. Among the 67 fallopian tubes analyzed with a validated histopathological protocol, there were 8 (11.94%) immunohistochemical abnormalities with a "p53 signature." CONCLUSIONS: With the recent demonstration of a tubal origin of most ovarian cancer, opportunistic salpingectomy could be a theoretically relevant prevention strategy. Bilateral salpingectomy could be performed during benign vaginal hysterectomy by experienced surgeons. The advantages and disadvantages of exclusive salpingectomy during pelvic floor surgery should be discussed with the patients.
Authors: Jessica N McAlpine; Gillian E Hanley; Michelle M M Woo; Alicia A Tone; Nirit Rozenberg; Kenneth D Swenerton; C Blake Gilks; Sarah J Finlayson; David G Huntsman; Dianne M Miller Journal: Am J Obstet Gynecol Date: 2014-01-09 Impact factor: 8.661
Authors: William H Parker; Michael S Broder; Zhimei Liu; Donna Shoupe; Cindy Farquhar; Jonathan S Berek Journal: Obstet Gynecol Date: 2005-08 Impact factor: 7.661
Authors: J Vorwergk; M P Radosa; K Nicolaus; N Baus; J Jimenez Cruz; M Rengsberger; M Gajda; H Diebolder; I B Runnebaum Journal: J Cancer Res Clin Oncol Date: 2014-02-27 Impact factor: 4.553
Authors: Supuni Kapurubandara; Victoria Qin; Divya Gurram; Anbu Anpalagan; Harry Merkur; Russell Hogg; Alison Brand Journal: Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol Date: 2015-09-07 Impact factor: 2.100
Authors: Laura A M van Lieshout; Miranda P Steenbeek; Joanne A De Hullu; M Caroline Vos; Saskia Houterman; Jack Wilkinson; Jurgen Mj Piek Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2019-08-28
Authors: Malou E Gelderblom; Laura A M Van Lieshout; Jurgen M J Piek; Joanne A De Hullu; Rosella P M G Hermens Journal: BMC Health Serv Res Date: 2021-07-25 Impact factor: 2.655