Analysis of Conservative Surgical Treatment and Prognosis of Microinvasive Squamous Cell Carcinoma of the Cervix Stage IA1: Results of Follow-Up to 20 Years.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the prognosis and recurrence of microinvasive squamous cervical (MIC) cancer stage IA1 in women treated conservatively or by hysterectomy, and followed-up to 20 years. METHODS: It was studied in a cohort of 139 women with MIC, 41 definitively managed by conization and 98 by hysterectomy from January 1994 to December 2003 and followed-up until 2013. The definitive treatment, age, conization technique (loop electrosurgical excision procedure or cold knife conization), cone margin, residual disease in hysterectomy specimen, and the association with recurrence (intraepithelial cervical neoplasia grade 3/intraepithelial vaginal neoplasia grade 3 or worse, and microinvasive or worse) were analyzed. RESULTS: There were 2.5 times more conservative treatment in younger women than older (>40 years), and high proportion of residual disease in hysterectomy specimens (67% of intraepithelial cervical neoplasia grade 3 or worse), more common if positive cone margin (74% vs 35%, P < 0.002). There were 2.3% (3/133) recurrences detected as microinvasive or worse, and 6% (8/133) recurrences detected as intraepithelial cervical neoplasia grade 3/intraepithelial vaginal neoplasia grade 3 or worse: 7.3% (3/41) in the conization group and 5.4% (5/92) in the hysterectomy group (P = 0.701). Almost all recurrences (88%, 7/8) were diagnosed until 36 months after treatment, and they were not associated with conization technique. There were no differences in risk of recurrence and overall disease-free survival time related to type of treatment. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates the good prognosis of MIC, regardless the treatment. When fertility is not a concern, hysterectomy should be considered as definitive treatment to avoid the risk of residual disease. Regular follow-up for a long period should be maintained.

Criteria for selection of laparoscopy for women with adnexal mass.

OBJECTIVES: We compared the indication of laparoscopy for treatment of adnexal masses based on the risk scores and tumor diameters with the indication based on gynecology-oncologists' experience. METHODS: This was a prospective study of 174 women who underwent surgery for adnexal tumors (116 laparotomies, 58 laparoscopies). The surgeries begun and completed by laparoscopy, with benign pathologic diagnosis, were considered successful. Laparoscopic surgeries that required conversion to laparotomy, led to a malignant diagnosis, or facilitated cyst rupture were considered failures. Two groups were defined for laparoscopy indication: (1) absence of American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology (ACOG) guideline for referral of high-risk adnexal masses criteria (ACOG negative) associated with 3 different tumor sizes (10, 12, and 14 cm); and (2) Index of Risk of Malignancy (IRM) with cutoffs at 100, 200, and 300, associated with the same 3 tumor sizes. Both groups were compared with the indication based on the surgeon's experience to verify whether the selection based on strict rules would improve the rate of successful laparoscopy. RESULTS: ACOG-negative and tumors≤10 cm and IRM with a cutoff at 300 points and tumors≤10 cm resulted in the same best performance (78% success=38/49 laparoscopies). However, compared with the results of the gynecology-oncologists' experience, those were not statistically significant. DISCUSSION: The selection of patients with adnexal mass to laparoscopy by the use of the ACOG guideline or IRM associated with tumor diameter had similar performance as the experience of gynecology-oncologists. Both methods are reproducible and easy to apply to all women with adnexal masses and could be used by general gynecologists to select women for laparoscopic surgery; however, referral to a gynecology-oncologist is advisable when there is any doubt.

[Laparoscopy for diagnosis and treatment of adnexal masses]. / Laparoscopia na abordagem inicial de tumores anexiais.

PURPOSE: To assess clinical factors, histopathologic diagnoses, operative time and differences in complication rates between women undergoing laparoscopy or laparotomy to diagnose and treat an adnexal mass and their association with laparoscopy failure. METHODS: In this prospective study, 210 women were invited to participate and 133 of them were included. Eighty-eight women underwent laparotomy and 45 underwent laparoscopy. Fourteen of the 45 laparoscopies were converted to laparotomy intraoperatively. We assessed whether age, body mass index (BMI), previous abdominal surgeries, CA-125, Index of Risk of Malignancy (IRM), tumor diameter, histological diagnosis, operative time and surgical complication rates differed between the laparoscopy group and the group converted to laparotomy and whether those factors were associated with conversion of laparoscopy to laparotomy. We also assessed surgical logs to evaluate the reasons, as stated by the surgeons, to convert a laparoscopy to laparotomy. RESULTS: In this research, 30% of the women had malignant tumors. CA-125, IRM, tumor diameter and operative times were higher for the laparotomy group than the laparoscopy group. Complication rates were similar for both groups and also for the successful laparoscopy and unsuccessful laparoscopy groups. The surgical complication rate in women with benign tumors was lower for the laparoscopy group than for the laparotomy group. The factors associated with conversion to laparotomy were tumor diameter and malignancy. During laparoscopy, adhesions a large tumor diameter were the principal causes of conversion. CONCLUSION: This study suggests that laparoscopy for the diagnosis and treatment of adnexal masses is safe and does not increase complication rates even in patients who need conversion to laparotomy. However, when doubt about the safety of the procedure and about the presence of malignancy persists, consultation with an expert gynecology-oncologist with experience in advanced laparoscopy is recommended. A large tumor diameter was associated with the necessity of conversion to laparotomy.

Laparoscopia na abordagem inicial de tumores anexiais / Laparoscopy for diagnosis and treatment of adnexal masses

OBJETIVO: Avaliar o uso da laparoscopia como método diagnóstico e terapêutico na abordagem inicial de tumores anexiais em população de risco para malignidade, bem como fatores clínicos associados à falha do método e conversão para laparotomia, e comparar taxas de complicação com pacientes cuja abordagem inicial se deu por laparotomia. MÉTODOS: Estudo prospectivo com 210 mulheres com exames de imagem prévios constando tumor anexial, das quais 133 foram incluídas. Destas, 45 foram submetidas à laparoscopia e 88, à laparotomia. Catorze das 45 cirurgias iniciadas por laparoscopia foram convertidas a laparotomia no intraoperatório. Foi avaliado se idade, índice de massa corporal (IMC), número de cirurgias abdominais prévias, CA-125, índice de risco de malignidade (IRM), diâmetro do tumor, duração da cirurgia e número de complicações cirúrgicas diferiram entre os grupos laparoscopia, laparoscopia com conversão à laparotomia e laparotomia. Foi também avaliado o motivo reportado pelos cirurgiões como falha da laparoscopia e a razão da conversão para laparotomia. RESULTADOS: A taxa de tumores malignos neste estudo foi de 30%. Houve diferença nos valores de CA-125, IRM e diâmetro do tumor entre os grupos laparoscopia e laparotomia. A duração da cirurgia foi maior no grupo de laparoscopias convertidas à laparotomia, porém as taxas de complicação cirúrgica foram semelhantes entre os grupos e, quando isolados os tumores benignos, as taxas de complicação cirúrgica da laparoscopia se mostraram inferiores à laparotomia. Dentre os fatores em estudo, apenas o tamanho do tumor esteve relacionado à conversão para laparotomia. CONCLUSÃO: Este estudo sugere que a abordagem inicial de pacientes com tumores ...

PURPOSE: To assess clinical factors, histopathologic diagnoses, operative time and differences in complication rates between women undergoing laparoscopy or laparotomy to diagnose and treat an adnexal mass and their association with laparoscopy failure. METHODS: In this prospective study, 210 women were invited to participate and 133 of them were included. Eighty-eight women underwent laparotomy and 45 underwent laparoscopy. Fourteen of the 45 laparoscopies were converted to laparotomy intraoperatively. We assessed whether age, body mass index (BMI), previous abdominal surgeries, CA-125, Index of Risk of Malignancy (IRM), tumor diameter, histological diagnosis, operative time and surgical complication rates differed between the laparoscopy group and the group converted to laparotomy and whether those factors were associated with conversion of laparoscopy to laparotomy. We also assessed surgical logs to evaluate the reasons, as stated by the surgeons, to convert a laparoscopy to laparotomy. RESULTS: In this research, 30% of the women had malignant tumors. CA-125, IRM, tumor diameter and operative times were higher for the laparotomy group than the laparoscopy group. Complication rates were similar for both groups and also for the successful laparoscopy and unsuccessful laparoscopy groups. The surgical complication rate in women with benign tumors was lower for the laparoscopy group than for the laparotomy group. The factors associated with conversion to laparotomy were tumor diameter and malignancy. During laparoscopy, adhesions a large tumor diameter were the principal causes of conversion. CONCLUSION: This study suggests that laparoscopy for the diagnosis and treatment of adnexal masses is safe and does not increase complication rates even in patients who need conversion to laparotomy. However, when doubt about the safety of the procedure and about the presence of malignancy persists, consultation with an expert gynecology-oncologist ...