First birth after uterine transposition in low-volume lymph node metastasis of cervical cancer: A long journey for success.

Locally advanced cervical cancer poses a significant challenge to fertility-sparing treatments. Pelvic radiotherapy impairs reproductive potential owing to ovarian, uterine, and endometrial side effects. This study presents a literature review of the main fertility-sparing therapeutic alternatives for locally advanced cervical cancer and a case report of the first childbirth following uterine transposition for gynecological malignancies.

Guidelines of the Brazilian Society of Surgical Oncology for anatomopathological, immunohistochemical, and molecular testing in female tumors.

INTRODUCTION: Precision medicine has revolutionized oncology, providing more personalized diagnosis, treatment, and monitoring for patients with cancer. In the context of female-specific tumors, such as breast, ovarian, endometrial, and cervical cancer, proper tissue collection and handling are essential for obtaining tissue, immunohistochemical (IHC), and molecular data to guide therapeutic decisions. OBJECTIVES: To establish guidelines for the collection and handling of tumor tissue, to enhance the quality of samples for histopathological, IHC, genomic, and molecular analyses. These guidelines are fundamental in informing therapeutic decisions in cancer treatment. METHOD: The guidelines were developed by a multidisciplinary panel of renowned specialists between June 12, 2013 and February 12, 2024. Initially, the panel deliberated on critical and controversial topics related to conducting precision medicine studies focusing on female tumors. Subsequently, 22 pivotal topics were identified within the framework and assigned to groups. These groups reviewed relevant literature and drafted preliminary recommendations. Following this, the recommendations were reviewed by the coordinators and received unanimous approval. Finally, the groups made the final adjustments, classified the level of evidence, and ranked the recommendations. CONCLUSION: The collection of surgical samples requires minimum quality standards to enable histopathological, IHC, genomic, and molecular analyses. These analyses provide crucial data for informing therapeutic decisions, significantly impacting potential survival gains for patients with female tumors.

Uterine transposition for fertility preservation in pelvic cancers.

OBJECTIVE: To review rates of uterine preservation and gonadal function, surgical outcomes, and pregnancy outcomes in patients undergoing surgical uterine transposition. METHODS: A structured search and analysis of the published literature on uterine transposition was conducted. Information on study type, sample size, patient characteristics, clinical indications, details of the surgical technique, trans-operative and post-operative results, success rates in preserving reproductive organ function and fertility were extracted. RESULTS: A total of 18 cases were reported to date. Patients' median age was 29 (range 3-38) years. Rectal cancers accounted for 9 (50%) cases of published cases of uterine transposition, followed by 6 (33%) cervical squamous cell carcinomas, 1 (6%) vaginal squamous cell carcinoma, 1 (6%) sacral yolk sac tumor, and 1 (6%) pelvic liposarcoma. The median time for uterine transposition to the upper abdomen was 150 (range 80-360) min, and 90 (range 80-310) min for organ reimplantation in the pelvis. Cervical ischemia occurred in 5 (27.8%) cases, being the most commonly reported complication. The median follow-up time was 25 months, and three patients achieved spontaneous pregnancies resulting in successful gestations, out of five patients who were reported as having tried. One patient experienced recurrence and succumbed to the tumor during treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Uterine transposition is a feasible and safe surgical approach that offers patients undergoing pelvic radiotherapy an option to preserve gonadal and uterine function, with the potential for spontaneous pregnancy.

Uterine transposition for fertility and ovarian function preservation after radiotherapy.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the feasibility of uterine transposition as a method of preserving fertility and ovarian function after pelvic radiation. METHODS: This prospective multicenter observational study included patients with non-gynecologic pelvic cancers who underwent pelvic radiation as part of their cancer treatment between June 2017 and June 2019. For inclusion in the study, patients were required to have normal menstrual cycles and hormone levels (follicle-stimulating hormone, luteinizing hormone, and estrogen) before treatment. Uterine transposition to the upper abdomen was performed prior to irradiation. Clinical examinations and Doppler ultrasonography were used to evaluate the gonadal vasculature post-surgery. The uterus was repositioned into the pelvis 2-4 weeks after radiation therapy or at the time of rectosigmoid resection in patients with rectal cancer who had undergone neoadjuvant treatment. Cancer treatment and follow-up were performed according to standard guidelines. RESULTS: Eight patients (seven with rectal cancer and one with pelvic liposarcoma) underwent uterine transposition at a median age of 30.5 years (range 19-37). The uterus was successfully preserved in six patients, accompanied by normal menses, hormonal levels, and vaginal intercourse after treatment. One patient with rectal cancer died of carcinomatosis 4 months after uterine transposition. One patient presented with uterine necrosis 4 days after uterine transposition, and the uterus was removed; however, one ovary was preserved. Cervical ischemia was the most common post-surgical complication in three (37.5%) patients. Three patients attempted to conceive, and two (66%) were spontaneously successful and delivered healthy babies at 36 and 38 weeks by cesarean section without complications. CONCLUSIONS: Uterine transposition is a feasible procedure for preserving gonadal and uterine function in patients requiring pelvic radiotherapy for non-gynecological cancer, with the potential for achieving spontaneous pregnancy and successful delivery.

MILACC study: could undetected lymph node micrometastases have impacted recurrence rate in the LACC trial?

OBJECTIVE: The etiology of inferior oncologic outcomes associated with minimally invasive surgery for early-stage cervical cancer remains unknown. Manipulation of lymph nodes with previously unrecognized low-volume disease might explain this finding. We re-analyzed lymph nodes by pathologic ultrastaging in node-negative patients who recurred in the LACC (Laparoscopic Approach to Cervical Cancer) trial. METHODS: Included patients were drawn from the LACC trial database, had negative lymph nodes on routine pathologic evaluation, and recurred to the abdomen and/or pelvis. Patients without recurrence or without available lymph node tissue were excluded. Paraffin tissue blocks and slides from all lymph nodes removed by lymphadenectomy were re-analyzed per standard ultrastaging protocol aimed at the detection of micrometastases (>0.2 mm and ≤2 mm) and isolated tumor cells (clusters up to 0.2 mm or <200 cells). RESULTS: The study included 20 patients with median age of 42 (range 30-68) years. Most patients were randomized to minimally invasive surgery (90%), had squamous cell carcinoma (65%), FIGO 2009 stage 1B1 (95%), grade 2 (60%) disease, had no adjuvant treatment (75%), and had a single site of recurrence (55%), most commonly at the vaginal cuff (45%). Only one patient had pelvic sidewall recurrence in the absence of other disease sites. The median number of lymph nodes analyzed per patient was 18.5 (range 4-32) for a total of 412 lymph nodes. A total of 621 series and 1242 slides were reviewed centrally by the ultrastaging protocol. No metastatic disease of any size was found in any lymph node. CONCLUSIONS: There were no lymph node low-volume metastases among patients with initially negative lymph nodes who recurred in the LACC trial. Therefore, it is unlikely that manipulation of lymph nodes containing clinically undetected metastases is the underlying cause of the higher local recurrence risk in the minimally invasive arm of the LACC trial.

Does sentinel node mapping impact morbidity and quality of life in endometrial cancer?

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the prevalence of post-operative complications and quality of life (QoL) related to sentinel lymph node (SLN) biopsy vs systematic lymphadenectomy in endometrial cancer. METHODS: A prospective cohort included women with early-stage endometrial carcinoma who underwent lymph node staging, grouped as follows: SLN group (sentinel lymph node only) and SLN+LND group (sentinel lymph node biopsy with addition of systematic lymphadenectomy). The patients had at least 12 months of follow-up, and QoL was assessed by European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cervical Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire 30 (EORTC-QLQ-C30) and EORTC-QLQ-Cx24. Lymphedema was also assessed by clinical evaluation and perimetry. RESULTS: 152 patients were included: 113 (74.3%) in the SLN group and 39 (25.7%) in the SLN+LND group. Intra-operative surgical complications occurred in 2 (1.3%) cases, and all belonged to SLN+LND group. Patients undergoing SLN+LND had higher overall complication rates than those undergoing SLN alone (33.3% vs 14.2%; p=0.011), even after adjusting for confound factors (OR=3.45, 95% CI 1.40 to 8.47; p=0.007). The SLN+LND group had longer surgical time (p=0.001) and need for admission to the intensive care unit (p=0.001). Moreover, the incidence of lymphocele was found in eight cases in the SLN+LND group (0 vs 20.5%; p<0.001). There were no differences in lymphedema rate after clinical evaluation and perimetry. However, the lymphedema score was highest when lymphedema was reported by clinical examination at 6 months (30.1 vs 7.8; p<0.001) and at 12 months (36.3 vs 6.0; p<0.001). Regarding the overall assessment of QoL, there was no difference between groups at 12 months of follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: There was a higher overall rate of complications for the group undergoing systematic lymphadenectomy, as well as higher rates of lymphocele and lymphedema according to the symptom score. No difference was found in overall QoL between SLN and SLN+LND groups.

Open Versus Minimally Invasive Radical Hysterectomy in Cervical Cancer: The CIRCOL Group Study.

PURPOSE: To analyze the survival outcomes of patients in a Brazilian cohort who underwent minimally invasive surgery (MIS) compared with open surgery for early stage cervical cancer. METHODS: A multicenter database was constructed, registering 1280 cervical cancer patients who had undergone radical hysterectomy from 2000 to 2019. For the final analysis, we included cases with a tumor ≤ 4 cm (stages Ia2 to Ib2, FIGO 2018) that underwent surgery from January 2007 to December 2017. Propensity score matching was also performed. RESULTS: A total of 776 cases were ultimately analyzed, 526 of which were included in the propensity score matching analysis (open, n = 263; MIS, n = 263). There were 52 recurrences (9.9%), 28 (10.6%) with MIS and 24 (9.1%) with open surgery (p = 0.55); and 34 deaths were recorded, 13 (4.9%) and 21 (8.0%), respectively (p = 0.15). We noted a 3-year disease-free survival (DFS) rate of 88.2% and 90.3% for those who received MIS and open surgery, respectively (HR 1.32; 95% CI: 0.76-2.29; p = 0.31) and a 5-year overall survival (OS) rate of 91.8% and 91.1%, respectively (HR 0.80; 95% CI: 0.40-1.61; p = 0.53). There was no difference in 3-year DFS rates between open surgery and MIS for tumors ≤ 2 cm (95.7% vs. 90.8%; p = 0.16) or > 2 cm (83.9% vs. 85.4%; p = 0.77). Also, the 5-year OS between open surgery and MIS did not differ for tumors ≤ 2 cm (93.1% vs. 93.6%; p = 0.82) or > 2 cm (88.9% vs. 89.8%; p = 0.35). CONCLUSIONS: Survival outcomes were similar between minimally invasive and open radical hysterectomy in this large retrospective multicenter cohort.

Open vs minimally invasive radical trachelectomy in early-stage cervical cancer: International Radical Trachelectomy Assessment Study.

BACKGROUND: Minimally invasive radical trachelectomy has emerged as an alternative to open radical hysterectomy for patients with early-stage cervical cancer desiring future fertility. Recent data suggest worse oncologic outcomes after minimally invasive radical hysterectomy than after open radical hysterectomy in stage I cervical cancer. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to compare 4.5-year disease-free survival after open vs minimally invasive radical trachelectomy. STUDY DESIGN: This was a collaborative, international retrospective study (International Radical Trachelectomy Assessment Study) of patients treated during 2005-2017 at 18 centers in 12 countries. Eligible patients had squamous carcinoma, adenocarcinoma, or adenosquamous carcinoma; had a preoperative tumor size of ≤2 cm; and underwent open or minimally invasive (robotic or laparoscopic) radical trachelectomy with nodal assessment (pelvic lymphadenectomy and/or sentinel lymph node biopsy). The exclusion criteria included neoadjuvant chemotherapy or preoperative pelvic radiotherapy, previous lymphadenectomy or pelvic retroperitoneal surgery, pregnancy, stage IA1 disease with lymphovascular space invasion, aborted trachelectomy (conversion to radical hysterectomy), or vaginal approach. Surgical approach, indication, and adjuvant therapy regimen were at the discretion of the treating institution. A total of 715 patients were entered into the study database. However, 69 patients were excluded, leaving 646 in the analysis. Endpoints were the 4.5-year disease-free survival rate (primary), 4.5-year overall survival rate (secondary), and recurrence rate (secondary). Kaplan-Meier methods were used to estimate disease-free survival and overall survival. A post hoc weighted analysis was performed, comparing the recurrence rates between surgical approaches, with open surgery being considered as standard and minimally invasive surgery as experimental. RESULTS: Of 646 patients, 358 underwent open surgery, and 288 underwent minimally invasive surgery. The median (range) patient age was 32 (20-42) years for open surgery vs 31 (18-45) years for minimally invasive surgery (P=.11). Median (range) pathologic tumor size was 15 (0-31) mm for open surgery and 12 (0.8-40) mm for minimally invasive surgery (P=.33). The rates of pelvic nodal involvement were 5.3% (19 of 358 patients) for open surgery and 4.9% (14 of 288 patients) for minimally invasive surgery (P=.81). Median (range) follow-up time was 5.5 (0.20-16.70) years for open surgery and 3.1 years (0.02-11.10) years for minimally invasive surgery (P<.001). At 4.5 years, 17 of 358 patients (4.7%) with open surgery and 18 of 288 patients (6.2%) with minimally invasive surgery had recurrence (P=.40). The 4.5-year disease-free survival rates were 94.3% (95% confidence interval, 91.6-97.0) for open surgery and 91.5% (95% confidence interval, 87.6-95.6) for minimally invasive surgery (log-rank P=.37). Post hoc propensity score analysis of recurrence risk showed no difference between surgical approaches (P=.42). At 4.5 years, there were 6 disease-related deaths (open surgery, 3; minimally invasive surgery, 3) (log-rank P=.49). The 4.5-year overall survival rates were 99.2% (95% confidence interval, 97.6-99.7) for open surgery and 99.0% (95% confidence interval, 79.0-99.8) for minimally invasive surgery. CONCLUSION: The 4.5-year disease-free survival rates did not differ between open radical trachelectomy and minimally invasive radical trachelectomy. However, recurrence rates in each group were low. Ongoing prospective studies of conservative management of early-stage cervical cancer may help guide future management.

Brazilian Society of Surgical Oncology surgical standards for resectable colorectal cancer liver metastases.

The management of colorectal cancer liver metastasis (CRLM) has become complex because of the increasing availability of medical, radiological, and surgical treatment options applied either alone or in combination. However, resection remains the only evidence-based curative therapy. These Brazilian Society of Surgical Oncology surgical standards are intended to guide clinicians in the decision-making process for modern surgical management of CRLM within a multidisciplinary team in an evidence-based framework, focusing on resectable disease.

Brazilian society of surgical oncology: Guidelines for the surgical treatment of mid-low rectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third leading cause of cancer in North America, Western Europe, and Brazil, and represents an important public health problem. It is estimated that approximately 30% of all the CRC cases correspond to tumors located in the rectum, requiring complex multidisciplinary treatment. In an effort to provide surgeons who treat rectal cancer with the most current information based on the best evidence in the literature, the Brazilian Society of Surgical Oncology (SBCO) has produced the present guidelines for rectal cancer treatment that is focused on the main topics related to daily clinical practice. OBJECTIVES: The SBCO developed the present guidelines to provide recommendations on the main topics related to the treatment of mid-low rectal cancer based on current scientific evidence. METHODS: Between May and June 2021, 11 experts in CRC surgery met to develop the guidelines for the treatment of mid-low rectal cancer. A total of 22 relevant topics were disseminated among the participants. The methodological quality of a final list with 221 sources was evaluated, all the evidence was examined and revised, and the treatment guideline was formulated by the 11-expert committee. To reach a final consensus, all the topics were reviewed via a videoconference meeting that was attended by all 11 of the experts. RESULTS: The prepared guidelines contained 22 topics considered to be highly relevant in the treatment of mid-low rectal cancer, covering subjects related to the tests required for staging, surgical technique-related aspects, recommended measures to reduce surgical complications, neoadjuvant strategies, and nonoperative treatments. In addition, a checklist was proposed to summarize the important information and offer an updated tool to assist surgeons who treat rectal cancer provide the best care to their patients. CONCLUSION: These guidelines summarize concisely the recommendations based on the most current scientific evidence on the most relevant aspects of the treatment of mid-low rectal cancer and are a practical guide that can help surgeons who treat rectal cancer make the best therapeutic decision.

Brazilian Society of Surgical Oncology guidelines for malignant bowel obstruction management.

BACKGROUND: Malignant bowel obstruction (MBO) is a frequent complication in advanced cancer patients and especially those with abdominal tumors. The clinical management of MBO requires a specific and individualized approach based on the disease prognosis. Surgery is recommended. Less invasive approaches such as endoscopic treatments should be considered when surgery is contraindicated. The priority of care for inoperable and consolidated MBO is to control the symptoms and promote the maximum level of comfort. OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to develop recommendations for the effective management of MBO. METHODS: A questionnaire was administered to all members of the Brazilian Society of Surgical Oncology, of whom 41 surgeons participated in the survey. A literature review of studies retrieved from the National Library of Medicine database was conducted on particular topics chosen by the participants. These topics addressed questions regarding the MBO management, to define the level of evidence and strength of each recommendation, and an adapted version of the Infectious Diseases Society of America Health Service rating system was used. RESULTS: Most aspects of the medical approach and management strategies reviewed were strongly recommended by the participants. CONCLUSIONS: Guidelines outlining the strategies for management MBO were developed based on the strongest evidence available in the literature.

Cancer risk-reducing surgery: Brazilian society of surgical oncology guideline part 1 (gynecology and breast).

BACKGROUND: Risk-reducing operations are an important part of the management of hereditary predisposition to cancer. In selected cases, they can considerably reduce the morbidity and mortality associated with cancer in this population. OBJECTIVES: The Brazilian Society of Surgical Oncology (BSSO) developed this guideline to establish national benchmarks for cancer risk-reducing operations. METHODS: The guideline was prepared from May to December 2021 by a multidisciplinary team of experts to discuss the surgical management of cancer predisposition syndromes. Fourteen questions were defined and assigned to expert groups that reviewed the literature and drafted preliminary recommendations. Following a review by the coordinators and a second review by all participants, the groups made final adjustments, classified the level of evidence, and voted on the recommendations. RESULTS: For all questions including risk-reduction bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy, hysterectomy, and mastectomy, major agreement was achieved by the participants, always using accessible alternatives. CONCLUSION: This and its accompanying article represent the first guideline in cancer risk reduction surgery developed by the BSSO, and it should serve as an important reference for the management of families with cancer predisposition.

Cancer risk-reducing surgery: Brazilian Society of Surgical Oncology Guideline Part 2 (Gastrointestinal and thyroid).

BACKGROUND: Risk-reducing operations are an important part of the management of hereditary predisposition to cancer. In selected cases, they can considerably reduce the morbidity and mortality associated with cancer in this population. OBJECTIVES: The Brazilian Society of Surgical Oncology (BSSO) developed this guideline to establish national benchmarks for cancer risk-reducing operations. METHODS: The guideline was prepared from May to December 2021 by a multidisciplinary team of experts to discuss the surgical management of cancer predisposition syndromes. Eleven questions were defined and assigned to expert groups that reviewed the literature and drafted preliminary recommendations. Following a review by the coordinators and a second review by all participants, the groups made final adjustments, classified the level of evidence, and voted on the recommendations. RESULTS: For all questions including risk-reducing colectomy, gastrectomy, and thyroidectomy, a major agreement was achieved by the participants, always using accessible alternatives. CONCLUSION: This and its accompanying article represent the first guideline in cancer risk reduction surgery developed by the BSSO and it should serve as an important reference for the management of families with cancer predisposition.

Sentinel lymph node mapping versus sentinel lymph node mapping with systematic lymphadenectomy in endometrial cancer: an open-label, non-inferiority, randomized trial (ALICE trial).

BACKGROUND: Growing evidence suggest that sentinel lymph node (SLN) biopsy in endometrial cancer accurately detects lymph node metastasis. However, prospective randomized trials addressing the oncological outcomes of SLN biopsy in endometrial cancer without lymphadenectomy are lacking. PRIMARY OBJECTIVES: The present study aims to confirm that SLN biopsy without systematic node dissection does not negatively impact oncological outcomes. STUDY HYPOTHESIS: We hypothesized that there is no survival benefit in adding systematic lymphadenectomy to sentinel node mapping for endometrial cancer staging. Additionally, we aim to evaluate morbidity and impact in quality of life (QoL) after forgoing systematic lymphadenectomy. TRIAL DESIGN: This is a collaborative, multicenter, open-label, non-inferiority, randomized trial. After total hysterectomy, bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy and SLN biopsy, patients will be randomized (1:1) into: (a) no further lymph node dissection or (b) systematic pelvic and para-aortic lymphadenectomy. MAJOR INCLUSION AND EXCLUSION CRITERIA: Inclusion criteria are patients with high-grade histologies (endometrioid G3, serous, clear cell, and carcinosarcoma), endometrioid G1 or G2 with imaging concerning for myometrial invasion of ≥50% or cervical invasion, clinically suitable to undergo systematic lymphadenectomy. PRIMARY ENDPOINTS: The primary objective is to compare 3-year disease-free survival and the secondary objectives are 5-year overall survival, morbidity, incidence of lower limb lymphedema, and QoL after SLN mapping ± systematic lymphadenectomy in high-intermediate and high-risk endometrial cancer. SAMPLE SIZE: 178 participants will be randomized in this study with an estimated date for completing accrual of December 2024 and presenting results in 2027. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03366051.

Minimally Invasive versus Abdominal Radical Hysterectomy for Cervical Cancer.

BACKGROUND: There are limited data from retrospective studies regarding whether survival outcomes after laparoscopic or robot-assisted radical hysterectomy (minimally invasive surgery) are equivalent to those after open abdominal radical hysterectomy (open surgery) among women with early-stage cervical cancer. METHODS: In this trial involving patients with stage IA1 (lymphovascular invasion), IA2, or IB1 cervical cancer and a histologic subtype of squamous-cell carcinoma, adenocarcinoma, or adenosquamous carcinoma, we randomly assigned patients to undergo minimally invasive surgery or open surgery. The primary outcome was the rate of disease-free survival at 4.5 years, with noninferiority claimed if the lower boundary of the two-sided 95% confidence interval of the between-group difference (minimally invasive surgery minus open surgery) was greater than -7.2 percentage points (i.e., closer to zero). RESULTS: A total of 319 patients were assigned to minimally invasive surgery and 312 to open surgery. Of the patients who were assigned to and underwent minimally invasive surgery, 84.4% underwent laparoscopy and 15.6% robot-assisted surgery. Overall, the mean age of the patients was 46.0 years. Most patients (91.9%) had stage IB1 disease. The two groups were similar with respect to histologic subtypes, the rate of lymphovascular invasion, rates of parametrial and lymph-node involvement, tumor size, tumor grade, and the rate of use of adjuvant therapy. The rate of disease-free survival at 4.5 years was 86.0% with minimally invasive surgery and 96.5% with open surgery, a difference of -10.6 percentage points (95% confidence interval [CI], -16.4 to -4.7). Minimally invasive surgery was associated with a lower rate of disease-free survival than open surgery (3-year rate, 91.2% vs. 97.1%; hazard ratio for disease recurrence or death from cervical cancer, 3.74; 95% CI, 1.63 to 8.58), a difference that remained after adjustment for age, body-mass index, stage of disease, lymphovascular invasion, and lymph-node involvement; minimally invasive surgery was also associated with a lower rate of overall survival (3-year rate, 93.8% vs. 99.0%; hazard ratio for death from any cause, 6.00; 95% CI, 1.77 to 20.30). CONCLUSIONS: In this trial, minimally invasive radical hysterectomy was associated with lower rates of disease-free survival and overall survival than open abdominal radical hysterectomy among women with early-stage cervical cancer. (Funded by the University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center and Medtronic; LACC ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00614211 .).

Perioperative Cancer Care in the Context of Limited Resources during the COVID-19 Pandemic: Brazilian Society of Surgical Oncology Recommendations.

BACKGROUND: As the COVID-19 pandemic moves from rich to poor nations, the healthcare systems of developing countries have to deal with this extra burden. As cancer care cannot stop and surgery is the main mechanism for cure and palliation, it is important to provide safe and rational access to cancer surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: From April 1st to May 1st, the committee of the Brazilian Society of Surgical Oncology (BSSO) was responsible for reviewing the literature and writing recommendations for perioperative cancer care in the context of limited resources during the pandemic. The recommendations were submitted to the BSSO board of directors. The orientations that were not consensual were removed and the suggestions were added to the text. From May 15 to 30th, the committee revised the recommendations, aligned them with the objectives of the work and standardize the text. DISCUSSION: The rational use of resources to reduce the risk of surgical cancer patients being operated on during the incubation period of a corona virus infection is important in this context. Prevalence of corona virus in the region, the need for surgery, surgical complexity, patient age and comorbidities, and availability of corona virus testing are central aspects in this matter and are discussed. CONCLUSIONS: We present a protocol, focused on the patients' outcomes, for safe and rational use of resources to reduce the risk of surgical cancer patients being operated on during the virus incubation period, in the context of areas with limited resources.

Uterine transposition for gynecological cancers.

OBJECTIVE: Uterine transposition has emerged as an alternative for fertility preservation in women with pelvic malignancies that require radiotherapy. The goal of this study was to evaluate the short-term outcomes of patients undergoing uterine transposition after trachelectomy for cervical cancer or before chemoradiation for vaginal cancer. METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated patients with early stage cervical cancer after radical trachelectomy or with vaginal cancer with indication for pelvic radiation who had uterine transposition performed as fertility sparing strategy. RESULTS: Four patients with cervical cancer and one patient with vaginal cancer were included. Median age was 32 years (range 28-38). All patients had squamous cell carcinomas. All patients with cervical cancer had radical trachelectomies with sentinel lymph node dissection (SLN). Two of these patients also had pelvic lymphadenectomies. Indications for adjuvant radiotherapy was due to Sedlis criteria in two patients and to lymph node metastasis in the other two patients. The patient with stage IIB vaginal cancer was recommended primary chemoradiation. All patients underwent uterine transposition before radiotherapy. The median uterine transposition surgical time was 90 min (range 80-205) and no early complications (30 days) occurred. Average time from uterine transposition to start of radiotherapy was 16 days (10-28). After radiation, the uterus along with the ovaries and tubes were repositioned and the residual cervix sutured to the vagina. One patient declined uterine reimplantation after radiation and underwent a hysterectomy. After a median follow-up of 25 months (range 1-30), all patients were without evidence of disease. All patients with preserved uterus have normal menses after treatment. One patient has attempted to conceive with IVF techniques without success. CONCLUSIONS: Uterine transposition may be an option in selected patients with cervical and vaginal cancers who want to preserve fertility. However, further studies that address its oncological safety and obstetrical outcomes are encouraged.

Incidence of adverse events in minimally invasive vs open radical hysterectomy in early cervical cancer: results of a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Standard treatment of early cervical cancer involves a radical hysterectomy and retroperitoneal lymph node dissection. The existing evidence on the incidence of adverse events after minimally invasive vs open radical hysterectomy for early cervical cancer is either nonrandomized or retrospective. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to compare the incidence of adverse events after minimally invasive vs open radical hysterectomy for early cervical cancer. STUDY DESIGN: The Laparoscopic Approach to Carcinoma of the Cervix trial was a multinational, randomized noninferiority trial that was conducted between 2008 and 2017, in which surgeons from 33 tertiary gynecologic cancer centers in 24 countries randomly assigned 631 women with International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics 2009 stage IA1 with lymph-vascular invasion to IB1 cervical cancer to undergo minimally invasive (n = 319) or open radical hysterectomy (n = 312). The Laparoscopic Approach to Carcinoma of the Cervix trial was suspended for enrolment in September 2017 because of an increased risk of recurrence and death in the minimally invasive surgery group. Here we report on a secondary outcome measure: the incidence of intra- and postoperative adverse events within 6 months after surgery. RESULTS: Of 631 randomly assigned patients, 536 (85%; mean age, 46.0 years) met inclusion criteria for this analysis; 279 (52%) underwent minimally invasive radical hysterectomy, and 257 (48%) underwent open radical hysterectomy. Of those, 300 (56%), 91 (16.9%), and 69 (12.8%) experienced at least 1 grade ≥2 or ≥3 or a serious adverse event, respectively. The incidence of intraoperative grade ≥2 adverse events was 12% (34/279 patients) in the minimally invasive group vs 10% (26/257) in the open group (difference, 2.1%; 95% confidence interval, -3.3 to 7.4%; P=.45). The overall incidence of postoperative grade ≥2 adverse events was 54% (152/279 patients) in the minimally invasive group vs 48% (124/257) in the open group (difference, 6.2%; 95% confidence interval, -2.2 to 14.7%; P=.14). CONCLUSION: For early cervical cancer, the use of minimally invasive compared with open radical hysterectomy resulted in a similar overall incidence of intraoperative or postoperative adverse events.

Guidelines of the Brazilian Society of Oncologic Surgery for pelvic exenteration in the treatment of cervical cancer.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The primary treatment for locally advanced cases of cervical cancer is chemoradiation followed by high-dose brachytherapy. When this treatment fails, pelvic exenteration (PE) is an option in some cases. This study aimed to develop recommendations for the best management of patients with cervical cancer undergoing salvage PE. METHODS: A questionnaire was administered to all members of the Brazilian Society of Surgical Oncology. Of them, 68 surgeons participated in the study and were divided into 10 working groups. A literature review of studies retrieved from the National Library of Medicine database was carried out on topics chosen by the participants. These topics were indications for curative and palliative PE, preoperative and intraoperative evaluation of tumor resectability, access routes and surgical techniques, PE classification, urinary, vaginal, intestinal, and pelvic floor reconstructions, and postoperative follow-up. To define the level of evidence and strength of each recommendation, an adapted version of the Infectious Diseases Society of America Health Service rating system was used. RESULTS: Most conducts and management strategies reviewed were strongly recommended by the participants. CONCLUSIONS: Guidelines outlining strategies for PE in the treatment of persistent or relapsed cervical cancer were developed and are based on the best evidence available in the literature.

Brazilian Society of Surgical Oncology guidelines for surgical treatment of endometrial cancer in regions with limited resources.

BACKGROUND: Approximately 70% of cancer-related deaths occur in low- and middle-income countries. In addition to social and racial inequalities, treatment options in these countries are usually limited because of the lack of trained staff and equipment, limited patient access to health services, and a small number of clinical guidelines. OBJECTIVES: The Brazilian Society of Surgical Oncology developed this guideline to address these barriers and guide physicians treating patients with endometrial cancer (EC) in regions with limited resources and few specialized centers. METHODS: The guideline was prepared from 10 January to 25 October 20192019 by a multidisciplinary team of 56 experts to discuss the main obstacles faced by EC patients in Brazil. Thirteen questions considered critical to the surgical treatment of these patients were defined. The questions were assigned to groups that reviewed the literature and drafted preliminary recommendations. Following a review by the coordinators and a second review by all participants, the groups made final adjustments for presentations in meetings, classified the level of evidence, and voted on the recommendations. RESULTS: For all questions including staging, fertility spearing treatment, genetic testing, sentinel lymph node use, surgical treatment, and other clinical relevant questions, major agreement was achieved by the participants, always using accessible alternatives. CONCLUSIONS: It is possible to provide adequate treatment for most EC patients in resource-limited areas, but the first option should be referral to specialized centers with more resources.