ABSTRACT
PURPOSE: To evaluate the incidence of lymphoceles, lymphorrhea, and lymphedema after systematic pelvic lymphadenectomy in patients who underwent laparoscopic or open abdominal staging for endometrial cancer. METHODS: A total of 138 consecutive women who underwent systematic laparoscopic pelvic lymphadenectomy for endometrial cancer staging were compared to 123 historical control subjects staged via an open approach. Postoperative screening for lymphadenectomy-related complications by ultrasound was consistently performed. RESULTS: The incidence of perioperative complications was lower in cases than in control subjects. Overall, lymphoceles were diagnosed in 19 (15.4%) and 2 (1.4%) patients who had open and laparoscopic staging, respectively (odds ratio 12.42; 95% confidence interval 2.82-54.55; P < 0.0001). Symptomatic lymphoceles were more frequent after open staging than after laparoscopy (P = 0.028). Lymphorrhea occurred in 1 and 4 patients after laparoscopic and open surgery (P = 0.19). No difference in the incidence of lymphedema was observed. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that laparoscopic endometrial cancer staging is associated with a lower occurrence of both asymptomatic and symptomatic lymphoceles compared to open surgery.
Subject(s)
Endometrial Neoplasms/pathology , Endometrial Neoplasms/surgery , Laparoscopy , Lymphatic Diseases/etiology , Lymphedema/etiology , Lymphocele/etiology , Postoperative Complications , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Case-Control Studies , Endometrial Neoplasms/complications , Female , Humans , Hysterectomy , Incidence , Lymph Node Excision , Lymphatic Diseases/epidemiology , Lymphatic Diseases/pathology , Lymphedema/epidemiology , Lymphedema/pathology , Lymphocele/epidemiology , Lymphocele/pathology , Middle Aged , Neoplasm Staging , Prognosis , Survival RateABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To describe the prevalence of hormone replacement therapy (HT) use by postmenopausal women doctors and doctors' wives in Italy and to explore the relationship between their personal characteristics and HT use. DESIGN: A total of 500 women doctors and 500 men doctors answering on behalf of their female partners were interviewed by a specialised company in the first months of 2003. Questions were meant to explore medical, behavioural and professional characteristics, personal use of HT, reasons for or against HT use and side effects of HT. The distribution of doctors' specialisation (general practitioners (GPs), gynaecologists, medical oncologists) in the sample interviewed was the same as that of the Italian medical community. RESULTS: Overall, 37% of women doctors and 39% of doctors' wives had ever used HT after menopause, of which 64 and 58%, respectively, were current users. The median duration of HT in the past users was 2.7 years for women doctors and 3.7 for doctors' wives. There were wide differences of HT use according to the type of specialisation: gynaecologists were more willing to use HT (56-59%) than GPs (30-31%) or medical oncologists (16-30%). Vasomotor symptoms (68-69%), followed by the prevention of osteoporosis (28-39%), were the main reasons for commencing HT. The main reasons not to take or to stop HT were the absence or resolution of menopausal symptoms. Only 8% of women doctors and 4% doctors' wives stopped HT after the publication of the WHI data. CONCLUSIONS: In Italy, women doctors/doctors' wives personally use HT much more than postmenopausal general population.
Subject(s)
Estrogen Replacement Therapy/statistics & numerical data , Physicians, Women , Physicians , Spouses , Estrogen Replacement Therapy/methods , Female , Humans , Italy , Male , Middle AgedABSTRACT
Thousands of women are treated each year for gynaecological cancers; many of these are already in menopause, while other younger patients will go into early menopause due to surgery, chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy to the pelvic region. The aim of this paper is to review the biological and clinical evidence in favour and against hormone replacement therapy (HRT) use after gynaecological cancers. With the exception of breast and endometrial cancer, there is no biological evidence that HRT may increase the recurrence risk. In women with previous endometrial cancer, HRT use is not supported by univocal and conclusive data to formulate specific recommendations, whereas most authors suggest that oestrogens may be used after adequate information about risks and benefits. The use of HRT in breast cancer patients is, at present, considered contra-indicated, even if results of clinical trials are not concordant. Therapeutic non-hormonal alternatives may be proposed to these patients.