Search

Introduction: The purpose of this study was to compare operative times, surgical outcomes, resource utilization, and hospital charges before and after the implementation of a sentinel lymph node (SLN) mapping algorithm in endometrial cancer., Methods: All patients with clinical stage I endometrial cancer were identified pre- (2012) and post- (2017) implementation of the SLN algorithm. Clinical data were summarized and compared between groups. Total hospital charges incurred on the day of surgery were extracted from the hospital financial system for each patient and all charges were adjusted to 2017 US dollars., Results: A total of 203 patients were included: 71 patients in 2012 and 130 patients in 2017. There was no difference in median age, body mass index, or stage. In 2012, 35/71 patients (49.3%) underwent a lymphadenectomy. In 2017, SLN mapping was attempted in 120/130 patients (92.3%) and at least one SLN was identified in 110/120 (91.7%). Median estimated blood loss was similar between groups (100 mL vs 75 mL, p=0.081). There was a significant decrease in both median operative time (210 vs 171 min, p=0.007) and utilization of intraoperative frozen section (63.4% vs 14.6%, p<0.0001). No significant differences were noted in intraoperative (p=1.00) or 30 day postoperative complication rates (p=0.30). The median total hospital charges decreased by 2.73% in 2017 as compared with 2012 (p=0.96)., Discussion: Implementation of an SLN mapping algorithm for high- and low-risk endometrial cancer resulted in a decrease in both operative time and intraoperative frozen section utilization with no change in surgical morbidity. While hospital charges did not significantly change, further studies are warranted to assess the true cost of SLN mapping., Competing Interests: Competing interests: LAM reports research support from AstraZeneca, outside the submitted work. SW reports grants from the NIH during the conduct of the study; personal fees and other from AstraZeneca, personal fees and other from Clovis, personal fees and other from Tesaro, personal fees and other from Roche/Genentech, other from Cotinga Pharmaceuticals, personal fees from Merck, personal fees from Pfizer, other from Novartis all outside the submitted work. MF reports grants and personal fees from Novadaq/Stryker, grants from Navidea, personal fees from Johnson and Johnson, personal fees from Genetech, personal fees from Ipsen all outside the submitted work. PS reports grants from Novartis, personal fees from Clovis Oncology all outside the submitted work., (© IGCS and ESGO 2020. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Objective: Treatment planning requires accurate estimation of surgical complexity (SC) and residual disease (RD) at primary debulking surgery (PDS) for advanced ovarian cancer (OC). We sought to independently validate two published computed tomography (CT) prediction models., Methods: We included stage IIIC/IV OC patients who underwent PDS from 2003 to 2011. Two prediction models which included imaging and clinical variables to predict RD > 1 and any gross RD, respectively, were applied to our cohort. Two radiologists scored CTs. Discrimination was estimated using the c-index and calibration were assessed by comparing the observed and predicted estimates., Results: The validation cohort consisted of 276 patients; median age of the cohort was 64 years old and majority had serous histology. The validation and model development cohorts were similar in terms of baseline characteristics, however the RD rates differed between cohorts (9.4% vs 25.4% had RD >1 cm; 50.7% vs. 66.6% had gross RD). Model 1, the model to predict RD >1 cm, did not validate well. The c-index of 0.653 for the validation cohort was lower than reported in the development cohort (0.758) and the model over-predicted the proportion with RD >1 cm. The second model to predict gross RD had excellent discrimination with a c-index of 0.762., Conclusions: We are able to validate a CT model to predict presence of gross RD in an independent center; the separate model to predict RD >1 cm did not validate. Application of the model to predict gross RD can help with clinical decision making in advanced ovarian cancer., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Malignant ascites is one of the most common sequela of epithelial ovarian cancer. It causes significant symptoms and can have a detrimental impact on patient quality of life, especially in women with recurrent ovarian cancer. The management of symptomatic ascites consists of both mechanical treatments that aim to drain the peritoneal cavity, and medical therapies that prevent and diminish the development of ascites. Mechanical options include serial paracentesis, peritoneal catheters, and peritoneovenous shunts. Pharmaceutical treatments include diuretics, angiogenesis inhibitors, and other targeted agents. There is a perception, without formal analysis, that intractable ascites is less common in the taxane era of therapy. In this review paper, we highlight current and emerging therapeutic strategies, complications and contraindications, and their effects on patient quality of life.

Purpose: Laparoscopy (LSC) offers superior patient outcomes compared to laparotomy. Small retrospective/prospective series have suggested robotics offers further reduction in postoperative pain and pain medication use compared to standard LSC. Our objective was to compare postoperative pain in patients undergoing robotically assisted (RBT) versus standard LSC for newly diagnosed endometrial cancer., Methods: All preoperative endometrial cancer cases scheduled for RBT and LSC from May 1, 2007 to June 9, 2010 were identified. For this analysis, we only included cases not requiring conversion to laparotomy. All patients were offered intravenous (IV) patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) postoperatively. Intraoperative equivalent fentanyl doses (IEFDs) and pain scores in the postanesthesia care unit (PACU) were assessed., Results: IV PCA was used in 206 RBTs (86 %) and 208 LSCs (88 %). Median IEFD was 425 μg for LSCs and 500 μg for RBTs (P = 0.03). Median pain scores on PACU arrival were similar in both groups. Median highest pain score was 5 for LSCs and 4 for RBTs (P = 0.007). Linear regression demonstrated that the IEFD was not correlated with the highest pain score (R = 0.09; P = 0.07). Fentanyl was used postoperatively in 196 of 206 RBTs (95 %) and 187 of 208 LSCs (90 %). The total fentanyl doses were 242.5 (range 0-2705) μg and 380 (range 0-2625) μg, respectively (P < 0.001). The median hourly fentanyl doses were 16.7 (range 0-122.5) μg and 23.5 (range 0-132.4) μg, respectively (P = 0.005). Simultaneous multiple regression analysis further demonstrated RBT was independently associated with a lower total fentanyl dose compared to LSC (P = 0.02)., Conclusions: RBT is independently associated with significantly lower postoperative pain and pain medication requirements compared to LSC. The amount of intraoperative fentanyl analgesia does not appear to correlate with postoperative pain.Endometrial cancer is the most common gynecologic malignancy in the United States, with an estimated 47,130 new cases in 2012.1 An estimated 287,100 women were diagnosed with endometrial cancer worldwide in 2008.2 Surgery is the primary treatment of choice for the majority of these women.3 The standard surgical approach has been total abdominal hysterectomy, bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy, and staging via laparotomy. Multiple retrospective series have shown that a less invasive surgical approach via laparoscopy (LSC) is feasible and safe, and also associated with improved perioperative outcomes compared to laparotomy in these patients.4 The Gynecologic Oncology Group (GOG) published results of the largest randomized trial (LAP2) comparing LSC to laparotomy in patients with newly diagnosed endometrial carcinoma in 2009.5,6 This landmark study essentially changed the accepted standard surgical approach in this group. Postoperative complications, median blood loss, and median length of stay (LOS), despite increased operative time, were significantly lower in LSC patients despite 25 % requiring conversion to laparotomy.5 The first 802 eligible patients randomized in LAP2 also participated in a quality-of-life (QOL) study. Within 6 weeks of surgery, patients assigned to LSC reported significantly better QOL on all scales other than fear of recurrence.6 Overall, during this 6-week postoperative period, patients assigned to LSC had superior QOL, fewer physical symptoms, less pain and pain-related interference with functioning, better physical functioning and emotional state, earlier resumption of normal activities, earlier return to work, and better body image compared to those assigned to laparotomy.6 Recurrence-free and overall survivals were the same in both groups.7 Multiple published retrospective series have shown possible benefits, such as reduced postoperative pain, using the robotic (RBT) platform compared to LSC or laparotomy in patients with endometrial cancer.8-11 In a randomized trial, LSC was found to be associated with less postoperative pain compared to vaginal approaches in patients undergoing hysterectomy for benign gynecologic disease.12 A small retrospective series reported further reductions in postoperative pain in patients who had undergone an RBT hysterectomy compared to a standard total LSC hysterectomy for benign indications.13 A recent cost analysis suggested that patients experienced less pain and required less pain medication use after RBT procedures compared to LSC for endometrial cancer.14 Based on these reports, we sought to analyze postoperative pain and the use of pain medication in patients undergoing RBT compared to standard transperitoneal LSC procedures for newly diagnosed endometrial cancer during a concurrent time period. Of note, current RBT surgery is not truly robotic in that it is not autonomous. A more appropriate term is “computer-assisted surgery,” but to satisfy current convention, we refer to it as “robotic surgery” in this manuscript.