Impact of increased utilization of neoadjuvant chemotherapy on survival in patients with advanced ovarian cancer: experience from a comprehensive cancer center / 부인종양

OBJECTIVE: The choice between primary debulking surgery (PDS) and neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) in advanced ovarian cancer remains controversial. We evaluated NAC use in our center before and after results from a randomized trial were published, with the aim to determine the impact of changes in the neoadjuvant strategy on survival in advanced-stage ovarian cancer. METHODS: We retrospectively investigated the clinical course of 435 patients with ovarian, tubal, or peritoneal carcinoma (International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics [FIGO] stage III or IV). According to the period of treatment, we stratified patients into a control group (n=216; diagnosed between 2006 and 2010; 83.8% underwent PDS) and a study group (n=219; diagnosed between 2011 and 2014; 48.9% received NAC followed by interval debulking surgery [IDS]). RESULTS: There were no between-group differences in age, body mass index, histology findings, or tumor grade. Compared to patients in the control group, those in the study group were more likely to receive NAC followed by IDS as first-line treatment (48.9% vs. 16.2%; p < 0.001), cytoreductive surgery to no-residual disease (21.5% vs. 10.2%; p < 0.001), or radical surgery (57.5% vs. 35.6%; p < 0.001). However, there was no between-group difference in postoperative morbidity. Kaplan-Meier analysis showed no between-group differences in progression-free or overall survival (p=0.449 and 0.952, respectively). CONCLUSION: NAC incorporation resulted in increased optimal cytoreduction rates although no significant differences in survival outcomes were noted. NAC is advantageous for patients with high perioperative morbidity or unresectable disease.

Delayed hemorrhage effect of local anesthesia with epinephrine in the loop electrosurgical excisional procedure

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to investigate factors preventing delayed hemorrhage after the loop electrosurgical excisional procedure (LEEP). METHODS: Medical records of patients who underwent LEEP at one university affiliated hospital from October 2013 to January 2015 were reviewed. Patients with or without delayed hemorrhage were classified. LEEP was performed either in an operating room under general anesthesia or in a procedure room with local anesthesia in the outpatient clinic. Delayed hemorrhage was defined as excisional site bleeding occurring between 1 and 30 days after the LEEP requiring intervention such as electro-cauterization, gauze packing, or application of another hemostatic agent. RESULTS: During the study period, 369 patients underwent LEEP. Twenty-three (6.2%) patients with delayed hemorrhage returned to our hospital either to the outpatient clinic or to the emergency unit. A third of the population (103, 27.9%) underwent LEEP in the operating room under general anesthesia without injection of local anesthesia. The remaining patients (266, 72.1%) underwent LEEP with local anesthesia (lidocaine HCl 2% with epinephrine 1:100,000) in the office procedure room. Patients given local anesthesia including epinephrine had significantly lower delayed hemorrhage compared to patients with general anesthesia without injection of local anesthesia (P=0.001). Hemostats, such as fibrin glue or patch, were used for the majority of patients (346, 93.8%) during the procedure. However, using hemostats was not statistically associated with delayed hemorrhage (P=0.163). CONCLUSION: Local anesthesia with the powerful vasoconstrictor epinephrine is effective not only to control perioperative bleeding, but also to prevent delayed hemorrhage after LEEP.

The ON-Q pain management system in elective gynecology oncologic surgery: Management of postoperative surgical site pain compared to intravenous patient-controlled analgesia

OBJECTIVE: The goal of this study was to compare postoperative surgical site pain in gynecologic cancer patients who underwent elective extended lower midline laparotomy and managed their pain with either the ON-Q pain management system (surgical incision site pain relief system, ON-Q pump) or an intravenous patient-controlled analgesia pump (IV PCA). METHODS: Twenty gynecologic cancer patients who underwent elective extended lower midline laparotomy were divided into two groups. One group received a 72-hour continuous wound perfusion of the local anesthetic ropivacaine (0.5%, study group) into the supraperitoneal layer of the abdominal incision through the ON-Q pump. The other group received intravenous infusion pump of patient-controlled analgesia (fentanyl citrate 20 mg/mL . kg+ondansetron hydrochloride 16 mg/8 mL+normal saline). Postoperative pain was assessed immediately and at 6, 24, 48, 72, and 96 hours after surgery using the visual analogue scale. RESULTS: Postoperative surgical site pain scores at 24, 48, and 72 hours after surgery were lower in the ON-Q group than the IV PCA group. Pain scores at 24 hours and 48 hours after surgery were significantly different between the two groups (P=0.023, P<0.001). Overall painkiller administration was higher in the ON-Q group but this difference was not statistically significant (5.1 vs. 4.3, P=0.481). CONCLUSION: This study revealed that the ON-Q pain management system is a more effective approach than IV PCA for acute postoperative surgical site pain relief after extended lower midline laparotomy in gynecologic cancer patients.