The Role of Minimally Invasive Surgery in the Care of Women with Ovarian Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Laparoscopic Treatment of Bulky Nodes in Primary and Recurrent Ovarian Cancer: Surgical Technique and Outcomes from Two Specialized Italian Centers

(1) Background: Minimally invasive surgery (MIS) represents a feasible approach in early-stage ovarian cancer, while this question is still unsolved for advanced and recurrent disease. (2) Methods: In this retrospective, multicenter study, we present a series of 21 patients who underwent MIS for primitive or recurrent epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) with bulky nodal metastasis and discuss surgical technique and outcomes in relation to the current literature. (3) Results: Complete cytoreduction at primary debulking surgery was obtained in 86% of cases. No complication occurred in our patients intraoperatively and only 11.1% of our patients experienced grade 2 and 3 postoperative complications. Notably, all the patients with isolated lymph nodal recurrence (ILNR) were successfully treated with a minimally invasive approach with no intra- or postoperative complications. (4) Conclusions: The results of our study are consistent with those reported in the literature, demonstrating that MIS may represent a safe approach in advanced and recurrent EOC with nodal metastasis if performed on selected patients by expert surgeons with an adequate setting and appropriate technique.

An overview of the current debate between using minimally invasive surgery versus laparotomy for interval cytoreductive surgery in epithelial ovarian cancer

The standard of care for treatment of advanced-stage epithelial ovarian cancer is primarily surgery followed by platinum-based chemotherapy, with the operative goal to achieve complete gross resection. Cytoreductive surgeries for epithelial ovarian cancer historically were performed via open laparotomy; however, as minimally invasive techniques became more widely accepted within gynecologic oncology, interest in employing this approach in the setting of cytoreductive surgery for epithelial ovarian cancer has grown. The purpose of this review was to examine the current debate between the use of minimally invasive surgery versus laparotomy as an approach to interval cytoreductive surgery in advanced epithelial ovarian cancer. While numerous retrospective and feasibility studies have found comparable outcomes with respect to complete gross residual disease, progression-free survival, and overall survival between minimally invasive and laparotomy approaches to interval cytoreductive surgery for epithelial ovarian cancer, methodological challenges limit the utility of these data. Given potential risks of underestimating disease burden and failing to achieve complete resection using a minimally invasive approach, further rigorous studies are needed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of minimally invasive surgery in this setting and to better define the subset of patients who would receive the greatest benefit from a minimally invasive approach.

The role of minimally invasive surgery in epithelial ovarian cancer treatment: a narrative review

Objectives

The aim of this narrative review is to summarize the available evidence on the use of minimal invasive surgery (MIS) in the management of epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC).

Background

MIS is currently performed to stage and treat EOC at different stage of presentation. We will evaluate risks and benefits of minimally invasive surgery for early stage EOC treatment, then potential advantages provided by staging laparoscopy in identifying patients suitable for primary cytoreductive surgery (PDS) will be discussed. Finally we will investigate the growing role of MIS in the treatment of advanced EOC after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) and in the treatment of EOC recurrence.

Methods

An electronic database search was performed on PubMed, Medline, and Google Scholar for relevant studies up to December 2022.

Conclusion

LPS represents a feasible surgical procedure for the staging and treatment in early, advanced and EOC relapse in selected patients treated in high-volume oncological centers by surgeons with adequate experience in advanced surgical procedures. Despite the increasing use of MIS over the last few years, randomized clinical trials are still needed to prove its effectiveness.

Robotic surgery in early and advanced ovarian cancer: Case selection for surgical staging and interval debulking surgery

OBJECTIVE

During the last decade several case series have been published on robotic surgery in early and advanced stage ovarian cancer. Although most studies lack a significant oncological follow-up, more importantly criteria for patient selection for both robotic surgical staging (R-SS) and robotic interval debulking surgery (R-IDS) are not well defined. The objective of this study was to assess the surgical and oncological outcomes, using well-defined selection criteria, between robotic and open surgery in early and advanced stage ovarian cancer.

STUDY DESIGN

Single-center retrospective case cohort study including 96 ovarian cancer patients. For early stage ovarian cancer, patients were selected for R-SS after laparoscopic salpingo-oophorectomy of a suspicious adnexal mass. For advanced stage ovarian cancer, only patients receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy and IDS were included in the study. Exclusion criteria were the presence of residual peritoneal disease after NACT and/or patients requiring additional complex surgical procedures.

RESULTS

For early stage ovarian cancer, similar median operative times were seen between R-SS and open surgical staging (O-SS), 132 min and 120 min respectively. Pelvic/para-aortic lymph node yield was similar between R-SS and O-SS, 22/11 nodes and 18/8 nodes respectively. Surgical upstaging occurred in 11.5% in the R-SS group and in 27.6% in the O-SS group. In advanced stage ovarian cancer, the BMI was significantly higher in the R-IDS group compared to the O-IDS group (27.8 vs 23.5; p =.006). The median follow was 52 months in the R-IDS group and 31 months in the O-IDS group. Recurrent disease occurred in 42.9% of the R-IDS group and in 45% of the O-IDS group. The length of hospitalization was significantly longer in the O-SS and O-IDS group (p <.00001).

CONCLUSION

Patients with clinically early stage ovarian cancer, confirmed after laparoscopic removal of a suspicious adnexal mass, are candidates for R-SS whilst maintaining similar surgical and oncological outcome measures as O-SS. In advanced ovarian cancer, suitable candidates for R-IDS are those who receive NACT with good response and no residual peritoneal disease, especially in patients with a high BMI, but large prospective randomized trials with well-defined criteria are needed.

Laparoscopic Surgery for Ovarian Neoplasms - What is Possible, What is Useful?

The use of minimally invasive surgical techniques is becoming increasingly important in gynecologic oncology due to technical advances and the increasing level of surgical expertise. In addition to laparoscopic approaches for the treatment of benign neoplasms, minimally invasive surgical methods have also become established in some areas for treating gynecologic malignancies. For tumor entities such as endometrial and cervical carcinoma, there are conclusive studies emphasizing the role of laparoscopy in surgical therapy. By contrast, due to a lack of prospective data with survival analyses, no clear conclusions can be drawn on the significance of laparoscopy in the surgical treatment of ovarian carcinoma. However, some smaller, mostly retrospective case-control studies and cohort studies open the way for a discussion, positing the possibility that laparoscopic surgical procedures, particularly for early ovarian carcinoma, are technically feasible and of a quality equivalent to that of conventional longitudinal laparotomy, and may also be associated with lower perioperative morbidity. In this article we discuss the most important aspects of using minimally invasive surgical techniques for ovarian carcinoma based on the current literature. In particular we look at the relevance of laparoscopy as a primary approach for surgical staging of early ovarian carcinoma, and we evaluate the role of diagnostic laparoscopy in assessing the operability of advanced ovarian carcinoma.

New Insights on the Minimal-Invasive Therapy of Cervical Cancer

Objective: The ideal management of early-stage cervical cancer has become the subject of a global controversy following the publication of a prospective study in 2018 that reported a worse oncologic outcome when comparing the minimally invasive approach to the laparotomy approach. The discussion involves both prospective and retrospective data and general and theoretical considerations. We wanted to look at the data available today and review the different opinions, offering an impartial assessment of the ongoing controversy. Methods: The available literature was reviewed, focusing on articles arguing for and against minimally invasive surgery in cervical cancer. We tried to avoid any fundamental bias, as is often evident in the available reviews on the subject. Literature both before and after the 2018 publication was taken into consideration. Results: As is usual in discussions of concepts, the literature that is now available provides arguments for both sides of this challenging issue, depending on one’s standpoint. Science-related writing is not immune to trends. There is a curious shift in opinion seen before and after 2018. One must question whether there was a prejudice in favor of minimally invasive surgery prior to the publication of the NEJM articles and a bias against it afterward. Conclusion: Whether further minimally invasive surgery for cervical cancer is invariable is tied to the more pressing question of how this surgery will have to be centralized in the future. Unless these questions are linked, no satisfactory solution can be found.

Does MIS Play a Role in the Treatment of Advanced Ovarian Cancer?

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy allows a minimally invasive approach for interval debulking in patients with ovarian cancer considered unresectable to no residual disease by laparotomy at diagnosis. The aim of the study was to evaluate the type of surgical approach at interval debulking (ID) after three courses of carboplatin and taxol in patients with unresectable ovarian cancer at diagnosis compared with the type of surgical approach at primary debulking (PD). A secondary objective was to compare the perioperative outcomes of MIS vs. laparotomy at ID. A retrospective review of the type of surgical approach at ID following three courses of carboplatin and taxol was compared with the surgical approach at PD, and a review of the perioperative outcomes of MIS vs. open at ID was performed during the period from 21 January 2012, through 21 February 2013, for stage IIIC > 2 cm or IV epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) unresectable at diagnosis and the surgical approach at PD. During the study period, 127 patients with stage IIIC or IV EOC met the inclusion criteria. Minimally invasive surgery (MIS), laparoscopic or robotic, was used in 21.6% of patients at ID and in 23.3% of patients at PD. At ID, MIS patients had a shorter hospital stay as compared to laparotomy (2 vs. 8 days; p < 0.001). At 5 year follow-up, 31.5% of EOC patients were alive (ID MIS: 47.5% vs. ID open: 30%; PD MIS: 41% vs. PD open: 28%), while 24.4% had no evidence of disease (ID MIS: 39% vs. ID open: 19.5%; PD MIS: 32% vs. PD open: 22%). Among living patients, 22% had evidence of disease. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy is a form of chemo-debulking and allows a minimally invasive approach at interval debulking in about one-fifth of the patients, with initial disease deemed unresectable to no residual tumor at initial diagnosis.

Comparison of Laparoscopic and Open Surgery for Women With Early-Stage Epithelial Ovarian Cancer

Objective

This study evaluated the oncologic outcomes of laparoscopy and laparotomy in the management of early-stage ovarian cancer patients.

Methods

We conducted an observational study of women diagnosed with International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) 2014 stage I ovarian cancer who underwent surgery at the West China Second University Hospital from 2012 to 2020. Patients who received adjuvant chemotherapy before surgery, those with non-epithelial histopathological types, or those with insufficient data were excluded. Using propensity score matching, data from consecutive laparoscopic patients treated by laparoscopy were matched 1:2 with a cohort of patients undergoing open surgery. The operative and survival outcomes among the matched cohorts were examined using the Kaplan–Meier method.

Results

Among 200 eligible patients, 74 patients undergoing laparoscopy were compared with a cohort of 126 patients undergoing open surgery. Baseline characteristics were similar between groups after matching. Patients who had laparoscopy had a shorter operative time (P = 0.001), a shorter hospital stay (P &lt;0.001), and lower blood loss (P = 0.001) than patients who had open surgery. The median (range) follow-up period was 43.0 (38.8–47.2) and 45.0 (36.0–54.0) months for cases and controls, respectively (P &lt;0.001). There are no significant differences in progression-free survival (P = 0.430, log-rank test) and overall survival (P = 0.067, log-rank test) between the two groups.

Conclusions

There is no difference in prognosis between laparoscopic and open surgery in women with stage I epithelial ovarian cancer. Laparoscopic treatment of early-stage ovarian cancer is safe and feasible for stage I epithelial ovarian cancer patients.

Update on the secondary cytoreduction in platinum-sensitive recurrent ovarian cancer: a narrative review

The ovarian cancer recurrence occurs in 75% of patients with advanced FIGO stage, and its treatment is a challenge for the oncologist in gynecology. The standard treatment of recurrent ovarian cancer (ROC) usually includes intravenous chemotherapy according to platinum sensitivity. Furthermore, maintenance treatment with target therapies [e.g., anti-angiogenic drug or PARP inhibitors (PARPi)], should be provided if not precedently administrated. In this scenario, secondary cytoreductive surgery (SCS) remains a practical but controversial option for platinum-sensitive ROC (PSROC). So far, several retrospective series and a Cochrane meta-analysis had concluded that SCS could determine better survival outcomes in ROC with favorable prognostic characteristics, such as the presence of a single anatomical site of recurrence, or when patients are accurately selected for surgery based on complete resection’s predictive models. Recently, three randomized clinical trials (RCTs) investigated the role of SCS in PSROC patients selected with different criteria. All the three RCTs showed a significant statistical advantage in progression-free survival (PFS) in the SCS group, with an even more significant difference in patients with complete cytoreduction (about 7-month PFS increased). Data on overall survival (OS) are different in the two completed trials. The GOG213 study has documented a longer OS of PSROC patients who received chemotherapy alone compared to surgery plus chemotherapy. Contrarily, the DESKTOP III trial showed 7.7 months of increased OS in the surgery group vs. chemotherapy alone, with a more difference in the complete tumor cytoreduction (CTC) group (12 months). These RCTs thereby suggest that undergoing complete cytoreduction may not be the only key and that the disease biology may also matter. Few recent retrospective series investigated the role of SCS according to BRCA mutation status and the effect of SCS in patients receiving emerging PARPi. A consequence of the developments in SCS and knowledge of different molecular pathways influencing the recurrent disease is that the future research objective should be to individualize and personalize the surgical approach.