Download HRT - Breast Cancer

Survey
yes no Was this document useful for you?
   Thank you for your participation!

* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project

Document related concepts
no text concepts found
Transcript
Laparoscopic Surgical Management of
Epithelial Ovarian Cancer
Cagatay Taskiran, MD, Assoc. Prof.
VKV American Hospital, Division of
Gynecologic Oncology
L/S & EOC
Primary trt for early stage disease
Restaging
Primary cytored’n for advanced disease
Surgical trt for recurrent disease
To assess resectability: Neoadjuvant CT
VATS
Early Stage is Rare
Standard Surgery for Early Stage
Ovarian Cancer
Comprehensive surgical staging
Exploration - Cytology and biopsies
Hyst-BSO- fertility sparing surgery
PPLNDTotal Omentectomy
Appendectomy
Up-staging
Schuler et al, 1999, EJOGRB
401 patients, 24% up-staging
Diaphragma
Omentum
PPALN
Cytology
Distribution of LN Metastasis
Literature
Early stage ovarian cancer & Laparoscopy
Retrospective series
Case-control studies
Meta-analysis
Cochrane review
Literature
Early stage ovarian cancer & Laparoscopy
1994, Querleu-Leblanc 9 patients
Still small series, number low
11 studies, 9-42 pt, 88
multicenter
Approximately 400 patients
Comparative Studies & Feasibility
Chi, AJOG, 2005, 50 pt
LN number, omental size: no problem
No conversion to L/T
Survival rates similar
Park, Ann Surg Oncol, 2008, 36 pt
LN number, omental size: no problem
Upstaging rate is same
No recurrence within 20 months
Comparative Studies & Feasibility
Whole Literature
Benefits of Laparoscopy
Endometrial cancer – randomized studies
EBL lower
Shorter hospital stay
Fewer postoperative complications
Improved QOL
Faster return to normal function
Similar for ovarian cancer – no RCT, shorter
interval to adjuvant chemotherapy
Benefits of Laparoscopy
Ghezzi, 2 012, 88 pt
Blood tx rate 2.8% vs 19.2%
Postoperative complications 3.2% vs 31%
Febrile morbidity
Ileus
Wound dehiscence
Wound infection
Potential Benefits & Some Conflicts
Cost
Complications
Hospital stay
Performance – return to work – CT ??
Improved fecundity after fertility sparing
surgery - adhesions
Possible Risks & Rupture
Rupture – IC – Chemo – survival is
worsened
L/T 10% and L/S 15-20%
Size and endobag usage
Rupture vs puncture ??
Meta-Analysis & Accepted 4 April AJOG
11 studies
EBL lower
Upstaging rate
Conversion to L/T
Recurrence rate
Intraop rupture
23%
3.7%
9.9% (6.7-14)
25% !!!!!
Only 1 port site-metastasis
Data
Overall 12 hasta
Borderline
EOC
LN number
Omentectomy
8 pt
4 pt (all restaging)
31-84
no problem
No conversion
No intra-postop comp
Median time 5 hr
Trocar Sites
Transperitoneal LA & Learning curve
 >20 cases PLN number satisfactory, time shorter,
complications decrease; LN number: 17-22
 Paraaortic LN number increase by years: 6----19
Kohler, GO, 2004
Transperitoneal LA & Duration
Kohler, GO, 2004
Re-staging & Up-staging
bowel
abdom.perit.
pevic perit.
pao lln
pelvic lln
omentum
diaphragm
cytology
%
0
5
10
15
20
25
14 studies 1971-1994
Timing of Restaging
Lehner 1998
Kinderman 1996
max. 15 days
max. 8 days
Adequate staging is very important
Primary Debulking for Advanced Disease
Fanning, 2011, GO
CT: omental metastasis – ascites
25 cases – 2 conversions: severe omental-RS
36% no residual
Hospiatal stay median 1 day
Blood loss 340 ml
Median OS: 3.5 years
Primary Debulking for Advanced Disease
Nezhat, JSLS, 2010
28 pt, 11 open after diagnostic L/S
%88 optimal
Time and complication rates are same
Blood loss and hospital stay less
9 NED, 6 AWD, 2 DOD
Secondary Cytoreduction
Magrina, 2013, GO, 2006-2010
L/S: 9, Robot:10, L/T:33 patients
15 types of different procedures
No conversion
No difference: Op. Time, comp’n, complete
debulking, survival
Endoscopy: Blood loss and hospital stay
L/T: 3 major procedures, upper and lower
quadrants
Secondary Cytoreduction
Nezhat, JSLS, 2012, only L/S
1999-2009, secondary 20, tertiary 3 cases
%82 optimal
200 min, 75 ml, stay 2 days
1 conversion
No intraop complication
NED:12
AWD:6
DOD:4
Median DFS: 72 months
Conclusion
 There is limited data on the role laprascopic surgery for early stage
ovarian cancer
 Although it was started at nearly the same time periods with EC
and CC it was not populirezed
 It seems feasible for surgical procedures, upstaging rates,
adequacy of lymphadenectomy and omentectomy
 Survival rates are similar with laparotomy
 Port site metastasis is rare, Major problem is tumor rupture
Conclusion
 There is limited data on the value of laparoscopic surgery for
recurrent disease. It seems feasible for highly selected patients at
very experienced centers
 It may be good way to assess resectability for advanced cases both
before primary surgery and after NACT
 VATS should be performed for patients having moderate to severe
pleural effusion beforre abdominal cytoreduction
Thanks for your attention ….