W. Etman, M. F. Abohashim, Ramadan M. Ali, O. Abd-Elaziz, Doaa Mandour, Rehab Hemeda, O. Harb, Walid A. Abdelsalam
{"title":"保留生育能力手术治疗年轻女性上皮性卵巢癌的价值:一项比较研究","authors":"W. Etman, M. F. Abohashim, Ramadan M. Ali, O. Abd-Elaziz, Doaa Mandour, Rehab Hemeda, O. Harb, Walid A. Abdelsalam","doi":"10.15557/cgo.2021.0003","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Epithelial ovarian cancer is increasingly often diagnosed in young females who wish to preserve their fertility. Fertilitypreserving surgeries, where conservation of the uterus and contralateral ovary was performed, might be beneficial for patients with stage I epithelial ovarian cancer, but their safety is still controversial. In the present study, we aimed to compare radical surgery and fertility-saving surgery in females with stage IA–C epithelial ovarian cancer for recurrence and survival rates, as well as to evaluate reproductive and obstetric outcomes for stage I epithelial ovarian cancer females who were managed with fertility-saving surgery. Materials and methods: We prospectively identified 60 patients aged ≤40 years who were diagnosed with stage I epithelial ovarian cancer. The patients in the fertility-preservation group underwent salpingo-oophorectomy on the side of the affected ovary in addition to incisional biopsy or wedge excision of the ovary on the other side. The patients in the radical surgery group underwent total hysterectomy and bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy. We followed up all patients for 5 years to assess their reproductive and oncological outcomes. Results: Patients in the fertility preservation surgery group were significantly younger (30 ± 4 versus 35 ± 5 years) (p < 0.001), their tumor sizes were smaller (3.4 ± 1.3 versus 6.0 ± 2.6 cm) (p < 0.001), of lower grade (p = 0.011), earlier stage (p < 0.001) and had more mucinous histology than patients in the radical surgery group. There were no statistically significant differences between both groups regarding tumor recurrence or survival rates. Of 25 patients who underwent fertility preservation surgery, 18 (72%) attempted to conceive. A total of 15/18 (83%) pregnancies were recorded, including 13 live births, 1 miscarriage, and 1 intrauterine fetal death. Conclusion: Fertility-sparing surgery could be an adequate alternative to radical surgery for young females with stage I epithelial ovarian cancer.","PeriodicalId":38739,"journal":{"name":"Current Gynecologic Oncology","volume":"4 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-07-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The value of fertility-sparing surgery for young females with epithelial ovarian cancer: a comparative study\",\"authors\":\"W. Etman, M. F. Abohashim, Ramadan M. Ali, O. Abd-Elaziz, Doaa Mandour, Rehab Hemeda, O. Harb, Walid A. Abdelsalam\",\"doi\":\"10.15557/cgo.2021.0003\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Background: Epithelial ovarian cancer is increasingly often diagnosed in young females who wish to preserve their fertility. Fertilitypreserving surgeries, where conservation of the uterus and contralateral ovary was performed, might be beneficial for patients with stage I epithelial ovarian cancer, but their safety is still controversial. In the present study, we aimed to compare radical surgery and fertility-saving surgery in females with stage IA–C epithelial ovarian cancer for recurrence and survival rates, as well as to evaluate reproductive and obstetric outcomes for stage I epithelial ovarian cancer females who were managed with fertility-saving surgery. Materials and methods: We prospectively identified 60 patients aged ≤40 years who were diagnosed with stage I epithelial ovarian cancer. The patients in the fertility-preservation group underwent salpingo-oophorectomy on the side of the affected ovary in addition to incisional biopsy or wedge excision of the ovary on the other side. The patients in the radical surgery group underwent total hysterectomy and bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy. We followed up all patients for 5 years to assess their reproductive and oncological outcomes. Results: Patients in the fertility preservation surgery group were significantly younger (30 ± 4 versus 35 ± 5 years) (p < 0.001), their tumor sizes were smaller (3.4 ± 1.3 versus 6.0 ± 2.6 cm) (p < 0.001), of lower grade (p = 0.011), earlier stage (p < 0.001) and had more mucinous histology than patients in the radical surgery group. There were no statistically significant differences between both groups regarding tumor recurrence or survival rates. Of 25 patients who underwent fertility preservation surgery, 18 (72%) attempted to conceive. A total of 15/18 (83%) pregnancies were recorded, including 13 live births, 1 miscarriage, and 1 intrauterine fetal death. Conclusion: Fertility-sparing surgery could be an adequate alternative to radical surgery for young females with stage I epithelial ovarian cancer.\",\"PeriodicalId\":38739,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Current Gynecologic Oncology\",\"volume\":\"4 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-07-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Current Gynecologic Oncology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.15557/cgo.2021.0003\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Current Gynecologic Oncology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15557/cgo.2021.0003","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景:上皮性卵巢癌越来越多地被诊断为希望保持生育能力的年轻女性。保留生育能力的手术,即保留子宫和对侧卵巢,可能对I期上皮性卵巢癌患者有益,但其安全性仍存在争议。在本研究中,我们旨在比较IA-C期上皮性卵巢癌女性的根治性手术和保生育手术的复发率和生存率,并评估接受保生育手术的I期上皮性卵巢癌女性的生殖和产科结局。材料和方法:我们前瞻性地确定了60例年龄≤40岁被诊断为I期上皮性卵巢癌的患者。保留生育能力组患者除另一侧卵巢行切口活检或楔形切除外,还行一侧卵巢输卵管切除术。根治性手术组行全子宫切除术和双侧输卵管卵巢切除术。我们对所有患者进行了5年的随访,以评估他们的生殖和肿瘤预后。结果:与根治性手术组相比,保留生育能力手术组患者更年轻(30±4岁vs 35±5岁)(p < 0.001),肿瘤大小更小(3.4±1.3 cm vs 6.0±2.6 cm) (p < 0.001),肿瘤分级更低(p = 0.011),肿瘤分期更早(p < 0.001),粘液组织学更多。两组在肿瘤复发率和生存率方面无统计学差异。在25例接受保留生育能力手术的患者中,有18例(72%)试图怀孕。共记录15/18例(83%)妊娠,包括13例活产、1例流产和1例宫内死胎。结论:保留生育能力的手术可能是年轻女性I期上皮性卵巢癌根治性手术的适当选择。
The value of fertility-sparing surgery for young females with epithelial ovarian cancer: a comparative study
Background: Epithelial ovarian cancer is increasingly often diagnosed in young females who wish to preserve their fertility. Fertilitypreserving surgeries, where conservation of the uterus and contralateral ovary was performed, might be beneficial for patients with stage I epithelial ovarian cancer, but their safety is still controversial. In the present study, we aimed to compare radical surgery and fertility-saving surgery in females with stage IA–C epithelial ovarian cancer for recurrence and survival rates, as well as to evaluate reproductive and obstetric outcomes for stage I epithelial ovarian cancer females who were managed with fertility-saving surgery. Materials and methods: We prospectively identified 60 patients aged ≤40 years who were diagnosed with stage I epithelial ovarian cancer. The patients in the fertility-preservation group underwent salpingo-oophorectomy on the side of the affected ovary in addition to incisional biopsy or wedge excision of the ovary on the other side. The patients in the radical surgery group underwent total hysterectomy and bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy. We followed up all patients for 5 years to assess their reproductive and oncological outcomes. Results: Patients in the fertility preservation surgery group were significantly younger (30 ± 4 versus 35 ± 5 years) (p < 0.001), their tumor sizes were smaller (3.4 ± 1.3 versus 6.0 ± 2.6 cm) (p < 0.001), of lower grade (p = 0.011), earlier stage (p < 0.001) and had more mucinous histology than patients in the radical surgery group. There were no statistically significant differences between both groups regarding tumor recurrence or survival rates. Of 25 patients who underwent fertility preservation surgery, 18 (72%) attempted to conceive. A total of 15/18 (83%) pregnancies were recorded, including 13 live births, 1 miscarriage, and 1 intrauterine fetal death. Conclusion: Fertility-sparing surgery could be an adequate alternative to radical surgery for young females with stage I epithelial ovarian cancer.