Current Preoperative Management of Vulvar Squamous Cell Carcinoma: An Overview.

Vulvar carcinoma is a rare cancer affecting the genital tract, constituting 4% of gynecological tumors. Vulvar squamous cell carcinoma (VSCC) is the most common type. Diagnosis relies on biopsy during vulvoscopy, plus imaging such as ultrasonography (USG), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and positron emission tomography (PET). This review aims to lay out a thorough overview as to the current preoperative management of VSCC, both in case of vulvar and lymph node involvement. The data research was conducted using the following databases: MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Sciences, Scopus, ClinicalTrial.gov, OVID and Cochrane Library from 2010 to 2024. The selection criteria included only original articles. Seventeen studies were assessed for eligibility. A concordance rate of 62.3% for vHSIL and 65.2% for carcinoma at vulvoscopy, with a sensitivity of 98%, specificity of 40%, PPV (Positive Predictive Value) of 37% and NPV (Negative Predictive Value) of 98% in identifying malignant lesions was found. Regarding the reliability of PET for staging and assessing lymph node involvement, a mean SUV (Standardized Uptake Value) for malignant vulvar lesions of 8.4 (range 2.5-14.7) was reported. In the case of MRI, useful for the evaluation of loco-regional infiltration and lymph node involvement, the ratio of the short-to-long-axis diameter and the reader's diagnostic confidence for the presence of lymph node metastasis yielded accuracy of 84.8% and 86.9%, sensitivity of 86.7% and 87.5%, specificity of 81.3% and 86.2%, PPV of 89.7% and 87.5% and NPV of 76.5% and 86.2%, respectively. A long lymph node axis >10 mm and a short diameter >5.8 mm were found to be predictors of malignancy. At USG, instead, the two main characteristics of potentially malignant lymph nodes are cortical thickness and short axis length; the combination of these ultrasound parameters yielded the highest accuracy in distinguishing between negative and positive lymph nodes. Despite the heterogeneity of the included studies and the lack of randomized clinical trials, this review provides a broad overview of the three imaging tools used for the presurgical management of VSCC. Nowadays, although MRI and PET represent the gold standard, ultrasound evaluation is taking on a growing role, as long as it is carried out by expert sonographer. The management of this rare disease should be always performed by a multidisciplinary team in order to precisely stage the tumor and determine the most suitable treatment approach.

Findings from the Use of Spinal Anesthesia in the Laparoscopic Treatment of Extrauterine Pregnancy: Could It Represent an Alternative to General Anesthesia?

INTRODUCTION: Minimally invasive procedures performed in laparoscopy, such as salpingectomy for ectopic pregnancy, can be combined with a minimally invasive anesthesia. The aim of this study was to assess the feasibility and the intraoperative and postoperative outcomes of laparoscopic surgery for ectopic pregnancy under spinal anesthesia (SA) compared to general anesthesia (GA) from the point of view of the surgeon, anesthesiologist, and patient. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was performed at DAI Materno Infantile of AOU Federico II of Naples, analyzing all medical records of women who met the inclusion criteria between April 2020 and April 2023. Eighty-two women (35 under SA in group A and 47 under GA in group B) undergone elective or emergency laparoscopic salpingectomy for ectopic tubal or ovarian pregnancy were included. RESULTS: Patients in group A reported less pain at 0 h (adjusted mean difference: -1.5; 95% CI: -2.3 to -0.7; p < 0.001) and after 6 h (adjusted mean difference: -1.1; 95% CI: -2.0 to -0.3; p = 0.01) while no statistically significant differences between the two groups at 12 and 24 h after surgery. No differences were observed among the type of analgesic and during the postoperative observation time, except for paracetamol at 0 h in group B. A faster resumption of bowel motility, patient's mobilization, and a shorter hospital stay were observed in group A compared to group B. Also greater odds of returning faster to daily activities emerged in group A (adjusted OR: 5.39; 95% CI: 1.77-16.37). A greater number of patients in group A were satisfied with the entire procedure compared to those of group B (33 [94.3%] vs. 37 [78.7%]). The general surgeon satisfaction was always very good or excellent in group A. Finally, all surgical steps were well tolerated in group A. CONCLUSION: In specific settings, SA is a feasible and safe procedure for the laparoscopic treatment of ectopic pregnancy.

C-section technique vs minilaparotomy after minimally invasive uterine surgery: a retrospective cohort study.

PURPOSE: Uterine leiomyomas are benign uterine tumors. The choice of surgical treatment is guided by patient's age, desire to preserve fertility or avoid "radical" surgical interventions such as hysterectomy. In laparotomy, the issue of extracting the fibroid from the cavity does not arise. However, in laparoscopy and robotic surgery, this becomes a challenge. The aim of the present study was to determine the optimal surgical approach for fibroid extraction following laparoscopic or robotic myomectomy in terms of postoperative pain, extraction time, overall surgical time, scar size, and patient satisfaction. METHODS: A total of 51 patients met the inclusion criteria and were considered in our analysis: 33 patients who had undergone the "ExCITE technique" (Group A), and 18 patients a minilaparotomy procedure (Group B), after either simple myomectomy, multiple myomectomy, supracervical hysterectomy, or total hysterectomy. The diagnosis of myoma was histologically confirmed in all cases. RESULTS: Regarding the postoperative pain evaluation, at 6 h, patients reported 4 [3-4] vs 6 [5.3-7] on the VAS in Group A and B, as well as at 12 h, 2 [0-2] vs 3.5 [2.3-4] in Group A and B, respectively: both differences were statistically significant (p < 0.001). No statistically significant difference at 24 h from surgery was found. All patients in Group A were satisfied with the ExCITE technique, while in Group B only 67% of them. The length of the hospital stay was significantly shorter in Group A as compared to Group B (p = 0.007). In terms of the operative time for the extraction of the surgical specimen, overall operative time, and the scar size after the surgery, there was a statistically significant difference for those in Group A. CONCLUSION: The ExCITE technique does not require specific training and allows the surgeon to offer a minimally invasive surgical option for patients, with also an aesthetic result. It is a safe and standardized approach that ensures tissue extraction without the need for mechanical morcellation.