Fertility-Sparing Approach in Patients with Endometrioid Endometrial Cancer Grade 2 Stage IA (FIGO): A Qualitative Systematic Review.

Background: Endometrial cancer (EC) is one of the most common gynecologic malignancy, mostly in postmenopausal women. The gold standard treatment for EC is surgery, but in the early stages, it is possible to opt for conservative treatment. In the last decade, different clinical and pathological markers have been studied to identify women who respond to conservative treatment. A lot of immunohistochemical markers have been evaluated to predict response to progestin treatment, even if their usefulness is still unclear; the prognosis of this neoplasm depends on tumor stage, and a specific therapeutic protocol is set according to the stage of the disease. Objective: (1) To provide an overview of the conservative management of Stage 1A Grade (G) 2 endometrioid EC (FIGO) and the oncological and reproductive outcomes related; (2) to describe the molecular alterations before and after progestin therapy in patients undergoing conservative treatment. Materials and Methods: A systematic computerized search of the literature was performed in the main electronic databases (MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, PubMed, and Cochrane Library), from 2010 to September 2021, in order to evaluate the oncological and reproductive outcomes in patients with G2 stage IA EC who ask for fertility-sparing treatment. The expression of several immunohistochemical markers was evaluated in pretreatment phase and during the follow-up in relation to response to hormonal therapy. Only scientific publications in English were included. The risk of bias assessment was performed. Review authors' judgments were categorized as "low risk," "high risk," or "unclear risk" of bias. Results: Twelve articles were included in the study: 7 observational studies and 5 case series/reports. Eighty-four patients who took progestins (megestrol acetate, medroxyprogesterone acetate, and/or levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine devices) were analyzed. The publication bias analysis turned out to be "low." 54/84 patients had a complete response, 23/84 patients underwent radical surgery, and 20/84 had a relapse after conservative treatment. Twenty-two patients had a pregnancy. The length of follow-up was variable, from 6 to 142 months according to the different studies analyzed. Several clinical and pathological markers have been studied to identify women who do not respond to conservative treatment: PR and ER were the most studied predictive markers, in particular PR appeared as the most promising; MMR, SPAG9, Ki67, and Nrf2-survivin pathway provided good results with a significant association with a good response to progestin therapy. However, no reliable predictive markers are currently available to be used in clinical practice. Conclusions: The conservative treatment may be an option for patients with stage IA G2 EEC who desire to preserve their fertility. The immunohistochemical markers evaluation looks promising in predicting response to conservative treatment. Further large series and randomized clinical trials are needed to confirm these results.

The challenging management of borderline ovarian tumors (BOTs) in women of childbearing age.

Borderline ovarian tumors (BOTs) account for approximately 15% of all epithelial ovarian cancers. In 80% of cases the diagnosis of BOTs is done at stage I and more than a third of BOTs occurs in women younger than 40 years of age wishing to preserve their childbearing potential; the issue of conservative surgical management (fertility-sparing treatment) is thus becoming of paramount importance. At early stages, the modalities of conservative treatment could range from mono-lateral cystectomy to bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy. Although cystectomy is the preferred method to promote fertility it can lead to an elevated risk of recurrence; therefore, an appropriate counseling about the risk of relapse is mandatory before opting for this treatment. Nevertheless, relapses are often benign and can be treated by repeated conservative surgery. Besides the stage of the disease, histological subtype is another essential factor when considering the proper procedure: as most mucinous BOTs (mBOTs) are more commonly unilateral, the risk of an invasive recurrence seems to be higher, compared to serous histotype, therefore unilateral salpingo-oophorectomy is recommended. In the appraisal of current literature, this review aims to gain better insight on the current recommendations to identify the right balance between an accurate staging and an optimal fertility outcome.

Minimally invasive anesthesia for laparoscopic hysterectomy: a case series.

PURPOSE: Regional anesthesia (RA) is considered as a "minimally invasive technique" to achieve anesthesia. To assess the feasibility and the perioperative outcomes of laparoscopic hysterectomy in regional anesthesia from the point of view of the surgeon, anesthesiologist and patient. METHODS: A retrospective search was performed to identify patients who underwent laparoscopic hysterectomy under RA from April 2020 to September 2021. Five patients affected by benign gynecological disease (atypical endometrial hyperplasia or uterine leiomyomas) were included. RESULTS: The postoperative pain, nausea, and vomiting (PONV) and the antiemetic/analgesic intake were evaluated. Postoperative surgical and anesthesiological variables were recorded. Duration of surgery was 84 ± 4.18 and no conversion to GA was required. According to VAS score, the postoperative pain during the whole observation time was less than 4 (median). A faster resumption of bowel motility (≤ 9 h) and patient's mobilization (≤ 4 h) were observed as well as a low incidence of post-operative nausea and vomit. Early discharge and greater patient's satisfaction were recorded. Intraoperatively pain score was assessed on Likert scale during all the stages of laparoscopy in RA, with only 2 patients complaining scarce pain (= 2) at pneumoperitoneum. CONCLUSION: RA showed to have a great impact on surgical stress and to guarantee a quicker recovery without compromising surgical results. RA technique could be a viable option for patients undergoing laparoscopic hysterectomy.

Uterine fibroids morcellation: a puzzle topic.

The laparoscopic approach for the treatment of uterine leiomyoma is increasingly practiced. The necessity to remove large specimens from the small laparoscopic incision has always been one of the main limits of this procedure. The unrestricted use of morcellation, to overtake this weak point of minimally invasive surgery, has opened in recent years a broad debate, especially on the risk of unintended dissemination of cells that could in some cases lead to extremely negative repercussions. This review analyzes these aspects and the principal recommendations from the major gynecological society on this topic surveying their effects. Furthermore, the purpose of this article is to provide an overview of the different morcellation techniques and how they are performed, evaluating their advantages and disadvantages. Contained morcellation seems to overcome many limits; however, based on recent data, an appropriate evaluation and selection of patients, as well as complete counseling before the surgery, are mandatory.

Spinal Anesthesia versus General Anesthesia in Gynecological Laparoscopic Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

INTRODUCTION: In the last years, spinal anesthesia (SA) has been emerging as an alternative to general anesthesia (GA) for the laparoscopic treatment of gynecological diseases, for better control of postoperative pain. The aim of the review is to compare the advantages of SA compared to GA. METHODS: MEDLINE, Scopus, ClinicalTrials.gov, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and CINAHL were searched from inception until March 2021. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomized studies (NRSs) about women underwent SA and GA for gynecological laparoscopic surgery were analyzed. Relevant data were extracted and tabulated. RESULTS: The primary outcomes included the evaluation of postoperative pain (described as shoulder pain), postoperative nausea and vomiting, and operative times. One hundred and eight patients were included in RCTs, 58 in NRSs. The qualitative analysis had conflicting results and for the most of parameters (hemodynamic variables, nausea, and postoperative analgesic administration) no statistically significant differences were observed: in the NRSs, contradictory results regarding the postoperative pain in SA and GA groups were reported. Regarding the quantitative analysis, in the RCTs, women who received SA had not significantly lower operative times (relative risk [RR] -4.40, 95% confidence interval [CI] -9.32-0.53) and a lower incidence of vomiting (RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.17-1.55); on the other hand, in the NRS, women who received SA had longer operative times (RR 5.05, 95% CI -0.03-10.14) and more episodes of vomiting (RR 0.56, 95% CI 0.10-2.97) compared to those with GA: anyway, the outcomes proved to be insignificant. CONCLUSIONS: Current evidence suggests no significant advantages to using SA over GA for laparoscopic treatment of gynecological diseases.