Laparoscopic Staging of Early Ovarian Cancer

1995 ◽  
Vol 58 (3) ◽  
pp. 301-306 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christophe Pomel ◽  
Diane Provencher ◽  
Jacques Dauplat ◽  
Philippe Gauthier ◽  
Guillaume Le Bouedec ◽  
...  
2011 ◽  
Vol 19 (5) ◽  
pp. 1589-1594 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fabio Ghezzi ◽  
Mario Malzoni ◽  
Enrico Vizza ◽  
Antonella Cromi ◽  
Ciro Perone ◽  
...  

2009 ◽  
Vol 19 (Suppl 2) ◽  
pp. S7-S13 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fabio Ghezzi ◽  
Antonella Cromi ◽  
Gabriele Siesto ◽  
Maurizio Serati ◽  
Eleonora Zaffaroni ◽  
...  

Abstract:We report our experience with laparoscopic staging of apparent early ovarian cancer, and we critically review the current literature on this issue. Potential limits of laparoscopic technique and theoretical concerns of using pneumoperitoneum-based surgery in this setting are addressed.Methods:Surgical, pathological, and oncological outcome data of consecutive patients undergoing comprehensive laparoscopic staging for presumed early ovarian cancer at our institution were prospectively collected.Results:The median operative time was 348 minutes (range, 255-450 minutes). The median estimated blood loss was 250 mL (range, 50-3000 mL). The mean number of pelvic and paraaortic lymph nodes harvested was 24.5 (SD, 6.3) and 9.8 (SD, 7.1), respectively. The disease was upstaged in 6 women (23.1%). No conversion to laparotomy and no intraoperative complication occurred. One patient had a retroperitoneal hematoma recognized in the postoperative period, and this required laparotomy and ligature of the hypogastric arteries to achieve hemostasis. The median follow-up period was 26.7 months (range, 2-83 months). Recurrence-free survival was 96.1%.Conclusions:Our results suggest that laparoscopic comprehensive surgical staging is a valuable treatment option for ovarian cancer patients with apparent early disease. Evidence is beginning to accumulate suggesting that minimally invasive surgery is at least equivalent in surgicopathological outcomes and middle-range oncological results to the conventional treatment approach, and early concerns are proving largely unfounded.


2011 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 89-96 ◽  
Author(s):  
Henk W. R. Schreuder ◽  
Thyrza O. S. Pattij ◽  
Ronald P. Zweemer ◽  
Marchien W. van Baal ◽  
René H. M. Verheijen

2017 ◽  
Vol 24 (2) ◽  
pp. 293-298 ◽  
Author(s):  
Valerio Gallotta ◽  
Carla Cicero ◽  
Carmine Conte ◽  
Giuseppe Vizzielli ◽  
Marco Petrillo ◽  
...  

2011 ◽  
Vol 71 (08) ◽  
Author(s):  
MJ Battista ◽  
J Steetskamp ◽  
N Mantai ◽  
S Gebhard ◽  
C Cotarelo ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Diana Žilovič ◽  
Rūta Čiurlienė ◽  
Ieva Vaicekauskaitė ◽  
Rasa Sabaliauskaitė ◽  
Sonata Jarmalaitė

Author(s):  
Daniel Necula ◽  
Daria Istrate ◽  
Jérôme Mathis

AbstractFertility preservation is an important option to consider for young women with low-grade early ovarian cancer. Fertility-sparing surgery (“FSS”) permits the conservation of the uterus and one of the ovaries. This technique is considered safe for stages IA G1, G2 and probably safe for IC G1 epithelial and non-epithelial ovarian cancers. There are still uncertainties and FSS is not fully accepted for stage IC G1, G2 and clear cell carcinoma. The difficulty in choosing the best option lies in the fact that there is a lack of prospective randomized studies, due to ethical and organizational issues. Retrospective studies and reviews showed reassuring results for FSS in terms of relapse and long term survival. The spontaneous pregnancy rate seems to decrease after FSS, but chemotherapy does not seem to have an impact on fertility rates. Compared with the general population, assisted reproductive techniques are considered safe and with similar fertility results.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document