Faisabilité de la salpingectomie prophylactique lors d’une hystérectomie d’indication bénigne par voie vaginale et évaluation de la prévalence des lésions tubaires occultes : étude préliminaire

Opportunistic salpingectomy at the time of vaginal hysterectomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Despite the rising rates of opportunistic salpingectomy at the time of surgery for non-malignant conditions, salpingectomy is not widely adopted during vaginal hysterectomy (VH) and has not been extensively investigated.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of the primary study was to determine the feasibility of bilateral opportunistic salpingectomy at the time of VH. Secondary aims included surgical outcomes, factors associated with patient selection, and the prevalence of incidental tubal malignancies.

SEARCH STRATEGY

In this systematic review and meta-analysis we searched Pubmed, Embase and ClinicalTrials.gov databases from inception to September 1, 2023, using relevant keywords.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Original articles with no language restriction reporting outcomes of women undergoing planned VH with opportunistic salpingectomy, were considered eligible. Studies including patients undergoing VH with and without opportunistic salpingectomy were also included.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

The Newcastle-Ottawa scale was used to assess quality of observational studies. DerSimonian-Laird random effects meta-analysis was performed and pooled effect estimates and proportions with corresponding 95% confidence intervals were computed. Heterogeneity was assessed using the I2 statistic.

RESULTS

Seven observational cohort studies including 4808 women undergoing opportunistic salpingectomy at the time of VH and 10 295 patients undergoing VH alone were selected. The pooled proportion of success was 81.83 per 100 observations (95% CI: 75.35-87.54). Opportunistic salpingectomy at the time of VH, when feasible, was associated with a significant reduction in intraoperative complications (OR 0.06, 95% CI: 0.01, -0.37, P = 0.03) and total operative time (95% CI: -17.80, -1.07, P = 0.03) compared to those where it failed. Successful salpingectomy was significantly hindered by nulliparity (OR 0.12, 95% CI: -17.69, -1.21, P < 0.001) and favored by pelvic organ prolapse (OR 3.20, 95% CI: 1.35, 7.55, P = 0.008). Immunohistochemical tubal abnormalities were found in 13/579 (2.1%) patients. The overall quality of the evidence, according to the GRADE assessment, was low.

CONCLUSION

Opportunistic salpingectomy is safe, effective, and feasible at the time of VH. Nulliparity and pelvic organ prolapse are factors potentially influencing surgical outcomes.

Prophylactic Salpingectomy during Hysterectomy for Benign Disease: A Prospective Study to Evaluate High-Grade Serous Ovarian Carcinoma Precursors

Recent findings suggest that high-grade serous ovarian cancer can originate in the fallopian tube. Not only has that made the identification of precursor lesions pivotal in early detection and prevention of these cancers, prophylactic salpingectomy alongside hysterectomy for benign indications has been increasingly proposed as well. The present prospective single-center study included 273 women who underwent opportunistic salpingectomy alongside laparoscopic supracervical hysterectomy. Uterine and tubal histopathological results as well as intra- and postoperative complications were evaluated. The complication rate was 3.3%, of which none were caused by salpingectomy. Uterine histopathology diagnosed 181 patients (66.8%) with uterine myomas, 60 patients (22.1%) with adenomyosis, 29 patients (10.7%) with adenomyomatosis, and, 1 patient (0.4%) without pathological abnormality. p53 signatures were detected in 221 right fallopian tubes (80.9%) and in 229 left tubes (83.9%). In total, 8 patients showed bilateral STIL (2.9%), whereas in 1 patient (0.4%) STIL was detected in the left tube only. No STIC were detected. Laparoscopic opportunistic salpingectomy is demonstrated to be both safe and feasible. It appears to be promising to reduce the risk for ovarian cancer, yet more studies are needed to undoubtedly confirm this.

Rationale for opportunistic salpingectomy during gynecological surgery for a benign condition: A review of the available literature

INTRODUCTION

Recent discoveries have shed light on the benefits of opportunistic salpingectomy in the prevention of ovarian cancer. However, in this time of increasing interest in the parameters of ovarian reserve, there are no national recommendations on the subject. This literature review provides an enlightened look at the rationale for performing an opportunistic salpingectomy.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the benefits and risks associated with opportunistic salpingectomy during surgery for a benign gynecological condition.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We carried out a systematic review of the literature using the Pubmed/Medline search engine and the Cochrane database.

RESULTS

A total of 61 articles were selected from over 300 references. The protective impact against cancer, which is widely demonstrated in the literature, is proof of the benefit of this procedure. Furthermore, no increase in intraoperative morbidity has been noted. However, the clinical impact on the ovarian reserve remains uncertain (in particular the occurrence of early pre-menopausal symptoms during the perimenopausal period). Nonetheless, the socioeconomic analysis supports performing opportunistic salpingectomy.

CONCLUSION

Performing opportunistic salpingectomy does not appear to cause an increase in morbidity but the impact on ovarian function is uncertain. The fact that there is a proven benefit of such a procedure against cancer indicates that prior to any surgery a clear discussion should be held with the patient in which they should be fully informed.

Hysterectomy with opportunistic salpingectomy versus hysterectomy alone

BACKGROUND

Ovarian cancer has the highest mortality rate of all gynaecological malignancies with an overall five-year survival rate of 30% to 40%. In the past two decades it has become apparent and more commonly accepted that a majority of ovarian cancers originate in the fallopian tube epithelium and not from the ovary itself. This paradigm shift introduced new possibilities for ovarian cancer prevention. Salpingectomy during a hysterectomy for benign gynaecological indications (also known as opportunistic salpingectomy) might reduce the overall incidence of ovarian cancer. Aside from efficacy, safety is of utmost importance, especially due to the preventive nature of opportunistic salpingectomy. Most important are safety in the form of surgical adverse events and postoperative hormonal status. Therefore, we compared the benefits and risks of hysterectomy with opportunistic salpingectomy to hysterectomy without opportunistic salpingectomy.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effect and safety of hysterectomy with opportunistic salpingectomy versus hysterectomy without salpingectomy for ovarian cancer prevention in women undergoing hysterectomy for benign gynaecological indications; outcomes of interest include the incidence of epithelial ovarian cancer, surgery-related adverse events and postoperative ovarian reserve.

SEARCH METHODS

The Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility (CGF) Group trials register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL and two clinical trial registers were searched in January 2019 together with reference checking and contact with study authors.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We intended to include both randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and non-RCTs that compared ovarian cancer incidence after hysterectomy with opportunistic salpingectomy to hysterectomy without opportunistic salpingectomy in women undergoing hysterectomy for benign gynaecological indications. For assessment of surgical and hormonal safety, we included RCTs that compared hysterectomy with opportunistic salpingectomy to hysterectomy without opportunistic salpingectomy in women undergoing hysterectomy for benign gynaecological indications.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures recommended by Cochrane. The primary review outcomes were ovarian cancer incidence, intraoperative and short-term postoperative complication rate and postoperative hormonal status. Secondary outcomes were total surgical time, estimated blood loss, conversion rate to open surgery (applicable only to laparoscopic and vaginal approaches), duration of hospital admission, menopause-related symptoms and quality of life.

MAIN RESULTS

We included seven RCTs (350 women analysed). The evidence was of very low to low quality: the main limitations being a low number of included women and surgery-related adverse events, substantial loss to follow-up and a large variety in outcome measures and timing of measurements.No studies reported ovarian cancer incidence after hysterectomy with opportunistic salpingectomy compared to hysterectomy without opportunistic salpingectomy in women undergoing hysterectomy for benign gynaecological indications. For surgery-related adverse events, there were insufficient data to assess whether there was any difference in both intraoperative (odds ratio (OR) 0.66, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.11 to 3.94; 5 studies, 286 participants; very low-quality evidence) and short-term postoperative (OR 0.13, 95% CI 0.01 to 2.14; 3 studies, 152 participants; very low-quality evidence) complication rates between hysterectomy with opportunistic salpingectomy and hysterectomy without opportunistic salpingectomy because the number of surgery-related adverse events was very low. For postoperative hormonal status, the results were compatible with no difference, or with a reduction in anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH) that would not be clinically relevant (mean difference (MD) -0.94, 95% CI -1.89 to 0.01; I² = 0%; 5 studies, 283 participants; low-quality evidence). A reduction in AMH would be unfavourable, but due to wide CIs, the postoperative change in AMH can still vary from a substantial decrease to even a slight increase.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There were no eligible studies reporting on one of our primary outcomes - the incidence of ovarian cancer specifically after hysterectomy with or without opportunistic salpingectomy. However, outside the scope of this review there is a growing body of evidence for the effectiveness of opportunistic salpingectomy itself during other interventions or as a sterilisation technique, strongly suggesting a protective effect. In our meta-analyses, we found insufficient data to assess whether there was any difference in surgical adverse events, with a very low number of events in women undergoing hysterectomy with and without opportunistic salpingectomy. For postoperative hormonal status we found no evidence of a difference between the groups. The maximum difference in time to menopause, calculated from the lower limit of the 95% CI and the natural average AMH decline, would be approximately 20 months, which we consider to be not clinically relevant. However, the results should be interpreted with caution and even more so in very young women for whom a difference in postoperative hormonal status is potentially more clinically relevant. Therefore, there is a need for research on the long-term effects of opportunistic salpingectomy during hysterectomy, particularly in younger women, as results are currently limited to six months postoperatively. This limit is especially important as AMH, the most frequently used marker for ovarian reserve, recovers over the course of several months following an initial sharp decline after surgery. In light of the available evidence, addition of opportunistic salpingectomy should be discussed with each woman undergoing a hysterectomy for benign indication, with provision of a clear overview of benefits and risks.

Opportunistic Salpingectomy at the Time of Benign Laparoscopic Hysterectomy: Assessment of Possible Complications and Histopathological p53-Signatures

Introduction

The aim of this study is to assess the prevalence of tubal histopathological abnormalities (serous tubal intraepithelial carcinoma STIC and p53 signatures) and the prevalence of perioperative and postoperative complications related to opportunistic laparoscopic salpingectomy in a low risk population.

Materials and Methods

In this observational prospective cohort, prophylactic bilateral salpingectomy during benign laparoscopic hysterectomy was systematically performed in 100 consecutive women. Peri- and postoperative complications were registered. Duration of salpingectomy and post-salpingectomy blood loss were also measured. Histopathological and immunohistochemical analysis with anti-p53 antibody were performed on the whole fallopian tubes according to a specific and validated protocol.

Results

Laparoscopic salpingectomy was always possible without any peri- or postoperative complication attributable to the salpingectomy itself. The mean duration was 428 seconds (354 – 596) and the blood loss was 9 cm ³ (2 – 15). Using histopathological and immunohistochemical assessment with anti-p53 antibody on 199 fallopian tubes (99 bilateral salpingectomies and one unilateral salpingectomy because of previous salpingectomy for ectopic pregnancy), there was a prevalence of 5.52% (11/199) of p53 signatures. No STIC were observed and no associated cancer.

Conclusions

Laparoscopic salpingectomy is both feasible and innocuous during benign hysterectomy. Meticulous histopathologic examination of the tubes may reveal specific abnormalities.

Opportunistic salpingectomy during vaginal hysterectomy for a benign pathological condition

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS

The objective was to evaluate the surgical feasibility of opportunistic salpingectomy or salpingo-oophorectomy during benign vaginal hysterectomy (HV) and the prevalence of occult tubal lesions.

METHODS

In this prospective study from 1 September 2013 to 1 November 2015, the prevalence of bilateral salpingectomy with or without ovariectomy and the prevalence of histopathological and immunohistochemical tubal abnormalities were assessed.

RESULTS

A total 115 patients were included. Bilateral salpingectomy was performed in 85 patients (73.92%; group A) and was technically impossible in 30 patients (26.08%; group B). Older patients (62.9 vs 57.5 years, p = 0.009), menopausal status (83.33% vs 62.35%, p = 0.03) and elevated BMI (27.58 vs 25.05 p = 0.03) were statistically associated with failure of salpingectomy. There was only one case of postoperative hemorrhage in group A. There was no difference with regard to intra- or postoperative complications, blood loss, and operating time between the two groups. Among the 67 fallopian tubes analyzed with a validated histopathological protocol, there were 8 (11.94%) immunohistochemical abnormalities with a "p53 signature."

CONCLUSIONS

With the recent demonstration of a tubal origin of most ovarian cancer, opportunistic salpingectomy could be a theoretically relevant prevention strategy. Bilateral salpingectomy could be performed during benign vaginal hysterectomy by experienced surgeons. The advantages and disadvantages of exclusive salpingectomy during pelvic floor surgery should be discussed with the patients.

Hysterectomy for benign disease: clinical practice guidelines from the French College of Obstetrics and Gynecology

OBJECTIVE

The objective of the study was to draw up French College of Obstetrics and Gynecology (CNGOF) clinical practice guidelines based on the best available evidence concerning hysterectomy for benign disease.

METHODS

Each recommendation for practice was allocated a grade, which depends on the level of evidence (clinical practice guidelines).

RESULTS

Hysterectomy should be performed by a high-volume surgeon (>10 hysterectomy procedures per year) (gradeC). Stimulant laxatives taken as a rectal enema are not recommended prior to hysterectomy (gradeC). It is recommended to carry out vaginal disinfection using povidone-iodine solution prior to hysterectomy (grade B). Antibiotic prophylaxis is recommended during hysterectomy, regardless of the surgical approach (grade B). The vaginal or laparoscopic approach is recommended for hysterectomy for benign disease (grade B), even if the uterus is large and/or the patient is obese (gradeC). The choice between these two surgical approaches depends on other parameters, such as the surgeon's experience, the mode of anesthesia, and organizational constraints (duration of surgery and medical economic factors). Vaginal hysterectomy is not contraindicated in nulliparous women (gradeC) or in women with previous cesarean section (gradeC). No specific hemostatic technique is recommended with a view to avoiding urinary tract injury (gradeC). In the absence of ovarian disease and a personal or family history of breast/ovarian carcinoma, the ovaries should be preserved in pre-menopausal women (grade B). Subtotal hysterectomy is not recommended with a view to reducing the risk of peri- or postoperative complications (grade B).

CONCLUSION

The application of these recommendations should minimize risks associated with hysterectomy.

[Urinary, infectious and digestive adverse events related to benign hysterectomy and the associated surgery on the Fallopian tube: Guidelines]

OBJECTIVES

To provide clinical practice guidelines from the French College of Obstetrics and Gynecology (CNGOF) based on the best evidence available, concerning the urinary, infectious and digestive adverse events related to benign hysterectomy and the associated surgery including opportunistic salpingectomy and adnexectomy.

MATERIAL AND METHOD

Review of literature using following keywords: benign hysterectomy; urinary injury; bladder injury; ureteral injury; vesicovaginal fistula; infection; bowel injury; salpingectomy.

RESULTS

Urinary catheter should be removed before 24h following uncomplicated hysterectomy (grade B). In case of urinary catheter during hysterectomy, immediate postoperative removal is possible (grade C). No hemostasis technics can be recommended to avoid urinary injury (grade C). There is not any evidence to recommend to perform a window in the broad ligament or an ureterolysis, to put ureteral stent or a uterine manipulator in order to avoid ureteral injury. An antibiotic prophylaxis by a cephalosporin is always recommended (grade B). Mechanical bowel preparation before hysterectomy is not recommended (grade B). If there is no ovarian cyst/disease and no familial or personal history of ovarian/breast cancer, ovarian conservation is recommended in premenopausal women (grade B). In postmenopausal women, informed consent and surgical approach should be taken in account to perform a salpingo-oophorectomy. Since the association salpingectomy and hysterectomy is not assessed in the prevention of ovarian cancer, systematic bilateral salpingectomy is not recommended (expert consensus).

CONCLUSIONS

Practical application of these guidelines should decrease the prevalence of visceral complications associated with benign hysterectomy.