Incomplete surgical staging in clinical early-stage ovarian cancer: guidelines versus daily practice
- PMID: 34778737
- PMCID: PMC8577441
- DOI: 10.1016/j.sopen.2021.09.002
Incomplete surgical staging in clinical early-stage ovarian cancer: guidelines versus daily practice
Abstract
Background: Incomplete surgical staging of patients with early-stage epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) has been reported in up to 98% of cases, when based on the International Federation of Obstetrics and Gynecology (FIGO) staging procedure. The aim of the present retrospective study was to clarify the reasons for incomplete staging.
Methods: The PRISMA (Prevention Recovery Information System for Monitoring and Analysis) technique was used to evaluate cases with FIGO I-IIa EOC based on incomplete staging from five gynecologic oncologic center hospitals in the Netherlands in the period 2010-2014.
Results: Fifty cases with an incomplete surgical staging of EOC according to national guidelines were included. The most common reasons for incomplete staging were insufficient random biopsies of the peritoneum (n = 34, 68%), and less than ten lymph nodes being resected and/or found at pathology (n = 16, 32%). The most mentioned reason for not performing biopsies was, besides forgetting to do so, believing that after careful inspection and palpation, taking biopsies is irrelevant and/or already are being taken while performing a hysterectomy (peritoneum of cul-de-sac, bladder). The value of contralateral pelvic lymph node dissection in case of a unilateral ovarian malignancy was also doubted, influencing the number of lymph nodes resected.
Conclusions: The most important reasons for incomplete staging in EOC are, besides omitting elements by accident, questioning the importance of obligatory elements of the staging procedure. A structured list of staging steps during surgery and more evidence-based consensus concerning these obligatory elements might increase the number of complete staging procedures in EOC.
Keywords: Lymph nodes; Ovarian cancer; Staging; Surgical oncology.
© 2021 Published by Elsevier Inc.
Figures
References
-
- Ledermann J.A., Raja F.A., Fotopoulou C., Gonzalez-Martin A., Colombo N., Sessa C. ESMO Guidelines Working Group. Newly diagnosed and relapsed epithelial ovarian carcinoma: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann. Oncol. 2013;24(Suppl 6):24–32. - PubMed
-
- Benedet J.L., Bender H., Jones H., 3rd, Ngan H.Y., Pecorelli S. FIGO staging classifications and clinical practice guidelines in the management of gynecologic cancers. FIGO committee on gynecologic oncology. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2000;70:209–262. - PubMed
-
- Timmers P.J., Zwinderman A.H., Coens C., Vergote I., Trimbos J.B. Understanding the problem of inadequately staging early ovarian cancer. Eur J Cancer. 2010;46:880–884. - PubMed
-
- Zanetta G., Rota S., Chiari S., Bonazzi C., Bratina G., Torri V. The accuracy of staging: an important prognostic determinator in stage I ovarian carcinoma. A multivariate analysis. Ann Oncol. 1998;9:1097–1101. - PubMed
-
- McGowan L., Lesher L.P., Norris H.J., Barnett M. Misstaging of ovarian cancer. Obstet Gynecol. 1985;65:568–572. - PubMed
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources