1. Management of Patients Diagnosed with Endometrial Cancer: Comparison of Guidelines.
- Author
-
Restaino, Stefano, Paglietti, Chiara, Arcieri, Martina, Biasioli, Anna, Della Martina, Monica, Mariuzzi, Laura, Andreetta, Claudia, Titone, Francesca, Bogani, Giorgio, Raimondo, Diego, Perelli, Federica, Buda, Alessandro, Petrillo, Marco, Greco, Pantaleo, Ercoli, Alfredo, Fanfani, Francesco, Scambia, Giovanni, Driul, Lorenza, and Vizzielli, Giuseppe
- Subjects
MEDICAL protocols ,MOLECULAR biology ,TUMOR classification ,ENDOMETRIAL tumors ,HEALTH equity ,TUMORS - Abstract
Simple Summary: Endometrial cancer has a high epidemiological impact, and its management is part of everyday clinical practice. International guidelines have been arranged over the years according to major recent discoveries. The application of the guidelines released by different international gynecological societies is still matter of debate as they diverge in many issues. Authors wanted to compare them and point out the differences, aiming to both draw the attention to a need of unification and to provide a useful tool for clinicians. Endometrial cancer is the most common gynecological malignancy in Europe and its management involves a variety of health professionals. In recent years, big discoveries were made concerning the management of patients diagnosed with endometrial cancer, particularly in the field of molecular biology and minimally invasive surgery. This requires the continuous updating of guidelines and protocols over the years. In this paper, we aim to summarize and compare common points and disparities among protocols for management of patients diagnosed with endometrial cancer by leading international gynecological oncological societies. We therefore systematically report the parallel among the guidelines based on the various steps patients with endometrial cancer usually undergo. The comparison between American and European protocols revealed some relevant disparities, in particular regarding surgical staging, molecular biology application as a prognostic tool and follow up regimens. This could possibly cause differences in interpreting and applying protocols in clinical practice in small centers, leading to a lack of adherence to guidelines or even prompting a confusing mix of them. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
- Published
- 2023
- Full Text
- View/download PDF