Robotic-assisted fertility-sparing surgery for early ovarian cancer.

OBJECTIVE: To show the feasibility and safety of robotic-assisted laparoscopic fertility-sparing surgery for earlystage ovarian cancer in women of reproductive age. METHODS AND DESIGN: The first patient was a 29-year-old para 0 woman with well-differentiated endometrioid adenocarcinoma of the ovary and complex endometrial hyperplasia with marked atypia. The second patient was a 31-year-old para 0 woman with an immature grade 1 teratoma. Both patients underwent robotic-assisted laparoscopic surgical staging. RESULTS: In the first patient, there were no intra- or postoperative complications. Operative time was 5 hours 43 minutes and estimated blood loss was 100 mL. She was discharged home on postoperative day 1. She received 3 cycles of carboplatin and paclitaxel, as well as medroxyprogesterone acetate for the duration of chemotherapy. She conceived twice spontaneously since surgery and had two successful deliveries. She currently has no evidence of disease. In the second patient, there were no intra- or postoperative complications. Operative time was 2 hours 52 minutes and estimated blood loss was 200 mL. She was discharged home on postoperative day 1. She declined adjuvant chemotherapy with bleomycin, etoposide, and cisplatin. She conceived spontaneously 4 months later and had a normal vaginal delivery. She currently has no evidence of disease. CONCLUSIONS: Because fertility-sparing surgery is now accepted as a viable option in young women with earlystage ovarian cancer, less invasive techniques are being used. With the advent of robotic-assisted surgery and its advantages over conventional laparoscopy, we show that it is a safe and feasible approach in select patients. This is the first reported series on robotic fertility-sparing surgery, but more research is needed.

The link between endometriosis and ovarian cancer: clinical implications.

OBJECTIVES: The objectives of this study were to evaluate the current evidence of the association of endometriosis and subsequent carcinoma of the ovary and to contextualize this evidence into daily practice issues. METHODS: This study is a critical review of observational and in vitro studies. RESULTS: Although the lifetime risk for ovarian cancer is low in general population and remains low in the broad spectrum of endometriosis, there may be clusters of individuals at higher risk of oncogenesis, whose identification would allow individualized surveillance and prophylactic interventions. Prevalence studies show that specific subtypes of ovarian cancer predominate in women with endometriosis. This has been validated in pathogenetic, genomic, immunobiologic, and hormonal studies. CONCLUSIONS: Taken together, these data provide a strong rationale for identifying, monitoring, counseling, and treating women with endometriosis who are at highest risk for cancer conversion.

Comparison of perioperative outcomes and complication rates between conventional versus robotic-assisted laparoscopy in the evaluation and management of early, advanced, and recurrent stage ovarian, fallopian tube, and primary peritoneal cancer.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to examine perioperative outcomes, including complication rates, of conventional laparoscopy (CL) versus robotic-assisted laparoscopy (RALS) in the evaluation and management of early, advanced, and recurrent ovarian, fallopian tube, and peritoneal cancer. METHODS: This is a retrospective analysis of a prospectively maintained database of surgery performed from July 2008 to December 2012. Sixty-three women had 83 surgeries performed; 22 surgeries for early-stage disease (International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics stage I) and 61 for advanced and/or recurrent disease. RESULTS: Of the 22 for early stage, 10 were CL, 9 were RALS, and 3 were laparoscopy converted to laparotomy (LP). There was no significant difference between CL and RALS in estimated blood loss (EBL, P = 0.27) or length of stay (LOS, P = 0.43); however, both had significantly less EBL (P = 0.03 and 0.03, respectively) and LOS (P = 0.03 and 0.03) than LP. There was no difference in OR time among the groups (P = 0.79). One patient (33%) had an intraoperative complication in LP. One patient (10%) had a postoperative complication in CL, 2 (22%) in RALS, and 1 (33%) in LP, with no significant difference (P = 0.61).Among the 42 patients with advanced/recurrent disease, 61 surgeries were performed: 14 diagnostic procedures and 47 cytoreductive surgeries. Of the 47, there was no difference in operating room time (P = 0.10). There was no difference in EBL or LOS between CL and RALS (P = 0.82, P = 0.87); however, both were less in CL (P < 0.001 and P = 0.02) and RALS (P = 0.01 and P = 0.02) compared with LP. There were 5 (63%) intraoperative transfusions in LP and none in CL or RALS. When including all surgeries for advanced/recurrent disease, there was 1 intraoperative complication (12%) in LP. There was no difference in postoperative complications between groups (P = 0.89); 8 patients (19%) had postoperative complications in CL, 2 (18%) in RALS, and 2 (25%) in LP. Overall, there were no grade 4 or 5 complications and no perioperative or intraoperative deaths. CONCLUSIONS: In our experience, perioperative outcomes are comparable between CL and RALS in both early and advanced/recurrent disease and not inferior to laparotomy, making CL and RALS an acceptable approach in selected patients.