Jaekyung Bae, Dong Woon Lee, Kiho You, Dong-Eun Lee, Ji Hyun Kim, Robert Armbrust, Sang-Yoon Park, Christina Fotopoulou, Myong Cheol Lim
{"title":"直肠乙状结肠切除术与直肠乙状结肠壁剥脱术治疗晚期卵巢癌细胞减少的浅直肠壁肿瘤的手术效果。","authors":"Jaekyung Bae, Dong Woon Lee, Kiho You, Dong-Eun Lee, Ji Hyun Kim, Robert Armbrust, Sang-Yoon Park, Christina Fotopoulou, Myong Cheol Lim","doi":"10.1016/j.ijgc.2025.101973","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study aimed to evaluate surgical outcomes of rectosigmoid resection versus rectosigmoid wall stripping for superficial tumor involvement during cytoreductive surgery for advanced ovarian cancer.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This retrospective study included patients with the International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics stage III to IV ovarian cancer who underwent rectosigmoid resection or rectosigmoid wall stripping during primary or interval cytoreductive surgery between January 2021 and January 2024. Inverse probability of treatment weighting was used to balance baseline characteristics. Perioperative and oncologic outcomes were compared using appropriate statistical tests, including χ<sup>2</sup>, Fisher exact, Wilcoxon rank-sum, and Z-tests.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 322 patients (rectosigmoid resection, n = 182; rectosigmoid wall stripping, n = 140) were included. A transition from rectosigmoid resection to rectosigmoid wall stripping began in mid-2022, resulting in an 83% reduction in rectosigmoid resection and a 900% increase in rectosigmoid wall stripping by late 2023. Rectosigmoid wall stripping was associated with shorter operation time (310 vs 400.8 minutes, p < .0001), lower blood loss (median, 489.4 vs 700 mL, p < .0001), fewer transfusions (31.3% vs 54.4%, p = .0002), shorter hospital stays (median, 11 vs 12 days, p = .0001), fewer thromboembolic events (6% vs 13.0%, p = .0356), and faster chemotherapy initiation (20 vs 22 days, p = .0002). Complete cytoreduction rates (72.6% vs 79.0%, p = .5152) and 6-month mortality (2.3% vs 1.7%, p = .6795) were similar. The rectosigmoid resection group showed a trend toward higher rates of bowel perforation (3.0% vs 0.8%) and fistula formation (2.0% vs 1.0%), although these differences were not statistically significant.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>For superficial and limited rectal serosal involvement, rectosigmoid wall stripping achieved macroscopic tumor clearance while reducing perioperative complications compared with rectosigmoid resection, which should be reserved for deeper or more extensive disease. Six-month follow-up showed comparable mortality rates between the 2 groups. Long-term and large-scale data are needed to ensure comparable oncologic safety.</p>","PeriodicalId":14097,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Gynecological Cancer","volume":"35 8","pages":"101973"},"PeriodicalIF":4.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Surgical outcomes of rectosigmoid colon resection versus rectosigmoid wall stripping for superficial rectal wall tumors at cytoreductions for advanced ovarian cancer.\",\"authors\":\"Jaekyung Bae, Dong Woon Lee, Kiho You, Dong-Eun Lee, Ji Hyun Kim, Robert Armbrust, Sang-Yoon Park, Christina Fotopoulou, Myong Cheol Lim\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.ijgc.2025.101973\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study aimed to evaluate surgical outcomes of rectosigmoid resection versus rectosigmoid wall stripping for superficial tumor involvement during cytoreductive surgery for advanced ovarian cancer.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This retrospective study included patients with the International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics stage III to IV ovarian cancer who underwent rectosigmoid resection or rectosigmoid wall stripping during primary or interval cytoreductive surgery between January 2021 and January 2024. Inverse probability of treatment weighting was used to balance baseline characteristics. Perioperative and oncologic outcomes were compared using appropriate statistical tests, including χ<sup>2</sup>, Fisher exact, Wilcoxon rank-sum, and Z-tests.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 322 patients (rectosigmoid resection, n = 182; rectosigmoid wall stripping, n = 140) were included. A transition from rectosigmoid resection to rectosigmoid wall stripping began in mid-2022, resulting in an 83% reduction in rectosigmoid resection and a 900% increase in rectosigmoid wall stripping by late 2023. Rectosigmoid wall stripping was associated with shorter operation time (310 vs 400.8 minutes, p < .0001), lower blood loss (median, 489.4 vs 700 mL, p < .0001), fewer transfusions (31.3% vs 54.4%, p = .0002), shorter hospital stays (median, 11 vs 12 days, p = .0001), fewer thromboembolic events (6% vs 13.0%, p = .0356), and faster chemotherapy initiation (20 vs 22 days, p = .0002). Complete cytoreduction rates (72.6% vs 79.0%, p = .5152) and 6-month mortality (2.3% vs 1.7%, p = .6795) were similar. The rectosigmoid resection group showed a trend toward higher rates of bowel perforation (3.0% vs 0.8%) and fistula formation (2.0% vs 1.0%), although these differences were not statistically significant.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>For superficial and limited rectal serosal involvement, rectosigmoid wall stripping achieved macroscopic tumor clearance while reducing perioperative complications compared with rectosigmoid resection, which should be reserved for deeper or more extensive disease. Six-month follow-up showed comparable mortality rates between the 2 groups. Long-term and large-scale data are needed to ensure comparable oncologic safety.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":14097,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Gynecological Cancer\",\"volume\":\"35 8\",\"pages\":\"101973\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Gynecological Cancer\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijgc.2025.101973\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Gynecological Cancer","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijgc.2025.101973","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
目的:本研究旨在评估晚期卵巢癌细胞减缩手术中浅表肿瘤累及的直肠乙状结肠切除术与直肠乙状结肠壁剥离的手术效果。方法:这项回顾性研究纳入了国际妇产科联合会III期至IV期卵巢癌患者,这些患者在2021年1月至2024年1月期间接受了直肠乙状结肠切除术或直肠乙状结肠壁剥离手术。使用治疗加权的逆概率来平衡基线特征。围手术期和肿瘤预后的比较采用适当的统计学检验,包括χ2、Fisher精确、Wilcoxon秩和和z检验。结果:共322例患者(直肠乙状结肠切除术,n = 182;包括直肠乙状结肠壁剥离(n = 140)。从直肠乙状结肠切除术到直肠乙状结肠壁剥离的转变始于2022年年中,到2023年底,直肠乙状结肠切除术减少了83%,直肠乙状结肠壁剥离增加了900%。直肠乙状肠壁剥脱术与较短的手术时间(310 vs 400.8分钟,p < 0.0001)、较低的出血量(中位数,489.4 vs 700 mL, p < 0.0001)、较少的输血(31.3% vs 54.4%, p = 0.0002)、较短的住院时间(中位数,11 vs 12天,p = 0.0001)、较少的血栓栓塞事件(6% vs 13.0%, p = 0.0356)和更快的化疗开始(20 vs 22天,p = 0.0002)相关。完全细胞减少率(72.6% vs 79.0%, p = .5152)和6个月死亡率(2.3% vs . 1.7%, p = .6795)相似。直肠乙状结肠切除术组肠穿孔(3.0% vs 0.8%)和瘘管形成(2.0% vs 1.0%)的发生率更高,尽管这些差异无统计学意义。结论:对于浅表和有限的直肠浆膜受累,与直肠乙状结肠切除术相比,直肠乙状结肠壁剥脱术可以在宏观上清除肿瘤,同时减少围手术期并发症,但对于更深或更广泛的疾病应保留。六个月的随访显示两组之间的死亡率相当。需要长期和大规模的数据来确保可比较的肿瘤安全性。
Surgical outcomes of rectosigmoid colon resection versus rectosigmoid wall stripping for superficial rectal wall tumors at cytoreductions for advanced ovarian cancer.
Objective: This study aimed to evaluate surgical outcomes of rectosigmoid resection versus rectosigmoid wall stripping for superficial tumor involvement during cytoreductive surgery for advanced ovarian cancer.
Methods: This retrospective study included patients with the International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics stage III to IV ovarian cancer who underwent rectosigmoid resection or rectosigmoid wall stripping during primary or interval cytoreductive surgery between January 2021 and January 2024. Inverse probability of treatment weighting was used to balance baseline characteristics. Perioperative and oncologic outcomes were compared using appropriate statistical tests, including χ2, Fisher exact, Wilcoxon rank-sum, and Z-tests.
Results: A total of 322 patients (rectosigmoid resection, n = 182; rectosigmoid wall stripping, n = 140) were included. A transition from rectosigmoid resection to rectosigmoid wall stripping began in mid-2022, resulting in an 83% reduction in rectosigmoid resection and a 900% increase in rectosigmoid wall stripping by late 2023. Rectosigmoid wall stripping was associated with shorter operation time (310 vs 400.8 minutes, p < .0001), lower blood loss (median, 489.4 vs 700 mL, p < .0001), fewer transfusions (31.3% vs 54.4%, p = .0002), shorter hospital stays (median, 11 vs 12 days, p = .0001), fewer thromboembolic events (6% vs 13.0%, p = .0356), and faster chemotherapy initiation (20 vs 22 days, p = .0002). Complete cytoreduction rates (72.6% vs 79.0%, p = .5152) and 6-month mortality (2.3% vs 1.7%, p = .6795) were similar. The rectosigmoid resection group showed a trend toward higher rates of bowel perforation (3.0% vs 0.8%) and fistula formation (2.0% vs 1.0%), although these differences were not statistically significant.
Conclusions: For superficial and limited rectal serosal involvement, rectosigmoid wall stripping achieved macroscopic tumor clearance while reducing perioperative complications compared with rectosigmoid resection, which should be reserved for deeper or more extensive disease. Six-month follow-up showed comparable mortality rates between the 2 groups. Long-term and large-scale data are needed to ensure comparable oncologic safety.
期刊介绍:
The International Journal of Gynecological Cancer, the official journal of the International Gynecologic Cancer Society and the European Society of Gynaecological Oncology, is the primary educational and informational publication for topics relevant to detection, prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of gynecologic malignancies. IJGC emphasizes a multidisciplinary approach, and includes original research, reviews, and video articles. The audience consists of gynecologists, medical oncologists, radiation oncologists, radiologists, pathologists, and research scientists with a special interest in gynecological oncology.