scholarly journals Minimally Invasive Surgery and Risk of Capsule Rupture for Women With Early-Stage Ovarian Cancer

JAMA Oncology ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 6 (7) ◽  
pp. 1110 ◽  
Author(s):  
Koji Matsuo ◽  
Yongmei Huang ◽  
Shinya Matsuzaki ◽  
Maximilian Klar ◽  
Lynda D. Roman ◽  
...  
2011 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 126-132 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ernest S. Han ◽  
Mark Wakabayashi

Epithelial ovarian cancer is often diagnosed in advanced stages and typically managed with surgical debulking followed by chemotherapy. For patients with presumed early-stage ovarian cancer, comprehensive surgical staging is essential for management, because 31% are upstaged. Over the past 15 years, minimally invasive techniques have improved and are increasingly being used to treat patients with ovarian cancer. Currently, only retrospective data support laparoscopic staging of patients with a suspicious adnexal mass or those surgically diagnosed with presumed early-stage ovarian cancer. Laparoscopy is also used in patients undergoing second-look procedures and to help evaluate whether patients should undergo optimal tumor debulking procedures or be initially managed with neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Randomized clinical studies are needed to further support the role of minimally invasive surgery in the treatment of ovarian cancer.


Cancers ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (23) ◽  
pp. 5887
Author(s):  
Ankit Dhamija ◽  
Jahnavi Kakuturu ◽  
J. W. Awori Hayanga ◽  
Alper Toker

A minimally invasive resection of thymomas has been accepted as standard of care in the last decade for early stage thymomas. This is somewhat controversial in terms of higher-staged thymomas and myasthenia gravis patients due to the prognostic importance of complete resections and the indolent characteristics of the disease process. Despite concerted efforts to standardize minimally invasive approaches, there is still controversy as to the extent of excision, approach of surgery, and the platform utilized. In this article, we aim to provide our surgical perspective of thymic resection and a review of the existing literature.


2021 ◽  
pp. ijgc-2021-002445
Author(s):  
Dimitrios Nasioudis ◽  
Emily M Ko ◽  
Lori Cory ◽  
Nawar Latif

ObjectiveTo investigate the prevalence of positive peritoneal cytology and lymph-vascular invasion by surgical approach among patients with early stage endometrioid endometrial carcinoma undergoing hysterectomy.MethodsThe National Cancer Database was accessed and patients with FIGO stage I endometrioid endometrial carcinoma (with no history of another tumor diagnosed) who underwent simple hysterectomy (open or minimally invasive) between January 2010 and December 2015 and had available data on the presence of lymph-vascular invasion and/or status of peritoneal cytology were selected for further analysis. The impact of a surgical approach on the odds of lymph-vascular invasion and positive peritoneal cytology was calculated after controlling for tumor grade, size, and depth of myometrial invasion.ResultsA total of 74 732 patients who met the inclusion criteria were identified. The rate of minimally invasive hysterectomy was 75.7%. Data on peritoneal cytology status and lymph-vascular invasion were available for 50 185 and 71 641 patients, respectively. A higher proportion of patients who had minimally invasive hysterectomy had positive peritoneal cytology (4.4% vs 2.3%, p<0.001), and presence of lymph-vascular invasion (10.4% vs 9.2%, p<0.001). After controlling for tumor size, tumor grade, and disease substage, the performance of minimally invasive surgery was associated with higher odds of positive peritoneal cytology (OR 2.08, 95% CI 1.83 to 2.37) and presence of lymph-vascular invasion (OR 1.33, 95% CI 1.25 to 1.41). After controlling for confounders there was no difference in survival between open and minimally invasive surgery groups (HR 0.93, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.004).ConclusionsMinimally invasive surgery may be associated with a higher incidence of positive peritoneal cytology and lymph-vascular invasion among patients with early stage endometrioid endometrial cancer. There was no difference in overall survival between patients who had laparotomy or minimally invasive surgery.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document