Intrauterine manipulator during hysterectomy for endometrial cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of oncologic outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to assess the effects on oncologic outcomes of intrauterine manipulator use during laparoscopic hysterectomy for endometrial cancer. DATA SOURCES: A systematic literature search was performed by an expert librarian in multiple electronic databases from inception to January 31, 2023. STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: We included all studies in the English language that compared oncologic outcomes (recurrence-free, cause-specific, or overall survival) between endometrial cancer patients who underwent total laparoscopic or robotic hysterectomy for endometrial cancer with vs without the use of an intrauterine manipulator. Studies comparing only peritoneal cytology status or lymphovascular space invasion were summarized for completeness. No selection criteria were applied to the study design. METHODS: Four reviewers independently reviewed studies for inclusion, assessed their risk of bias, and extracted data. Pooled hazard ratios with 95% confidence intervals were estimated for oncologic outcomes using the random effect model. Heterogeneity was quantified using the I2 tests. Publication bias was assessed by funnel plot and Egger test. RESULTS: Out of 350 identified references, we included 2 randomized controlled trials and 12 observational studies for a total of 14 studies and 5,019 patients. The use of an intrauterine manipulator during hysterectomy for endometrial cancer was associated with a pooled hazard ratio for recurrence of 1.52 (95% confidence interval, 0.99-2.33; P=.05; I2=31%; chi square P value=.22). Pooled hazard ratio for recurrence was 1.48 (95% confidence interval, 0.25-8.76; P=.62; I2=67%; chi square P value=.08) when only randomized controlled trials were considered. Pooled hazard ratio for overall survival was 1.07 (95% confidence interval, 0.65-1.76; P=0.79; I2=44%; chi square P value=.17). The rate of positive peritoneal cytology or lymphovascular space invasion did not differ using an intrauterine manipulator. CONCLUSION: Intrauterine manipulator use during hysterectomy for endometrial cancer was neither significantly associated with recurrence-free and overall survival nor with positive peritoneal cytology or lymphovascular space invasion, but further prospective studies are needed.

Major vessel resection for complete cytoreduction in primary advanced and recurrent ovarian malignancies: A case series and systematic review of the literature - pushing the boundaries in oncovascular surgery.

INTRODUCTION: Oncovascular surgery (the removal of major blood vessels infiltrated by cancer) is challenging but can be key to achieve complete cytoreduction in patient with advanced ovarian cancer. The aim of this study was to review the literature on oncovascular surgery in ovarian cancer and to report the details of all the cases performed at our institution. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the database of ovarian cancer patients who underwent debulking surgery at the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology of Verona University between January 2021 and 2023. Patients with at least one major vessel resection during cytoreduction were identified. We then systematically review the literature searching Pubmed and Embase from inception to January 2023 to report all cases of surgery for ovarian cancer with concomitant major vessel resection. RESULTS: Five patients with advanced/recurrent ovarian cancer underwent major vascular resection at our institution. Vascular involvement was preoperatively identified in all cases and no case of vascular resection was performed after accidental injury. The major vessels removed were the inferior vena cava (n = 2), the common iliac veins (n = 2), the external iliac arteries (n = 2), the left common iliac artery (n = 1), and the left external iliac vein (n = 1). All patients underwent other non-gynecological cytoreductive procedures prior to vessel removal and had R0 obtained. Three (60%) patients experienced one or more postoperative complications. The literature search identified a total of seven cases of major vessels resection in ovarian cancer surgery. A single or multiple major vessels were removed in two (28.6%) and five (72.4%) cases, respectively. All the seven patients underwent vascular reconstruction. Four (57.1%) patients reported postoperative complications. Overall, 66.7% of the 12 total identified patients were free from disease at the last follow-up [median 15.5 months (range 5-25)]. CONCLUSIONS: Oncovascular surgery is feasible in selected patients with ovarian cancer, provided that a multidisciplinary approach with customized care is available.

Fertility-sparing treatment in advanced-stage serous borderline ovarian tumors. An analysis from the MITO14 study database.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate oncological and reproductive outcomes of women undergoing fertility-sparing surgery (FSS) for stage II-III serous borderline ovarian tumors (BOTs). METHODS: A multi-institutional retrospective study was conducted within the MITO Group. RESULTS: A total of 91 patients were recruited. The median follow-up time from primary cytoreduction was 127 months (IQR range 91-179). Forty-nine patients (53.8%) experienced at least one recurrence (median time to first relapse 22 months, IQR range 9.5-57). At univariable analysis, significant predictors of relapse were: size of largest extra-ovarian lesion, peritoneal cancer index, completeness of cytoreduction, type of implants. After multivariable analysis, the size of extra-ovarian lesions and the presence of invasive implants resulted as the only independent predictors of recurrence. Median disease-free survival (DFS) was 96 months (95% CI, 24.6-167.3), while median disease-specific survival (DSS) was not reached. Twenty-nine patients (31.8%) attempted to conceive: 20 (68.9%) achieved at least one pregnancy and 18 (62%) gave birth to a healthy child. At the end of the observation period, 88 patients (96.7%) showed no evidence of disease, 2 (2.2%) were alive with disease, and 1 patient (1.1%) died from BOT. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the recurrence high rate, FSS provides good chances of reproductive success with no impact on DSS. The presence of invasive peritoneal implants affects the DFS but not DSS nor reproductive outcome. The risk of recurrence would not seem to be related to the ovarian preservation per se, but to the natural history of the initial peritoneal spread.