Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Could uterine conservation be an option in presumed early-stage epithelial ovarian cancer?

  • Gynecologic Oncology
  • Published:
Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

In early-stage epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC), patients usually undergo a hysterectomy. However, in fertility sparing surgery (FSS), carefully selected patients could conserve their uterus. The aim of our study was to evaluate the incidence and epidemiologic characteristics associated with uterine involvement in patients with early-stage EOC, outside of FSS.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective, monocentric, study from 2003 to 2019 and included all patients with a presumed early-stage EOC (FIGO I) who underwent a hysterectomy. The incidence of uterine involvement, predictive factors of uterine involvement, and the impact of uterine involvement on survival (recurrence-free survival and overall survival) were analyzed.

Results

Eighty-five patients had an early-stage EOC. Of these, six had an uterine involvement (7%). The populations of patients with or without uterine involvement did not differ except for CA 125 at diagnosis (136 ± 138 versus 356 ± 723, p = 0.04, respectively). No patient or tumor characteristics were predictive of uterine involvement. Uterine involvement was not associated with recurrence-free survival (HR = 1.26, IC95% 0.36–4.4, p = 0.72) or overall survival (HR = 0.7, IC95% 0.1–6.1, p = 0.77).

Conclusion

Due to the small size of our sample, no conclusion can be drawn, yet it could be hypothesized that, for selected patients, a systematic hysterectomy could be discussed, notably in restaging surgery.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

Data Availability

Data is available upon request.

References

  1. Torre LA, Trabert B, DeSantis CE et al (2018) Ovarian cancer statistics, 2018. CA Cancer J Clin 68:284–296

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  2. Colombo N, Sessa C, du Bois A et al (2019) ESMO–ESGO consensus conference recommendations on ovarian cancer: pathology and molecular biology, early and advanced stages, borderline tumours and recurrent disease†. Ann Oncol 30:672–705

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Prat J, FIGO Committee on Gynecologic Oncology (2015) FIGO’s staging classification for cancer of the ovary, fallopian tube, and peritoneum: abridged republication. J Gynecol Oncol 26:87–89

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Bentivegna E, Fruscio R, Roussin S et al (2015) Long-term follow-up of patients with an isolated ovarian recurrence after conservative treatment of epithelial ovarian cancer: review of the results of an international multicenter study comprising 545 patients. Fertil Steril 104:1319–1324

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. du Bois A, Heitz F, Harter P (2013) Fertility-sparing surgery in ovarian cancer: a systematic review. Onkologie 36:436–443

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Bentivegna E, Gouy S, Maulard A et al (2016) Fertility-sparing surgery in epithelial ovarian cancer: a systematic review of oncological issues. Ann Oncol 27:1994–2004

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Canlorbe G, Chabbert-Buffet N, Uzan C (2021) Fertility-sparing surgery for ovarian cancer. J Clin Med 10:4235

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. Schuurman T, Zilver S, Samuels S et al (2021) Fertility-sparing surgery in gynecologic cancer: a systematic review. Cancers 13:1008

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. Liu D, Cai J, Gao A et al (2020) Fertility sparing surgery vs radical surgery for epithelial ovarian cancer: a meta-analysis of overall survival and disease-free survival. BMC Cancer 20:320

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  10. Laughlin-Tommaso SK, Satish A, Khan Z et al (2020) Long-term risk of de novo mental health conditions after hysterectomy with ovarian conservation: a cohort study. Menopause N Y N 27:33–42

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Wilson L, Pandeya N, Byles J et al (2018) Hysterectomy and incidence of depressive symptoms in midlife women: the Australian Longitudinal Study on Women’s Health. Epidemiol Psychiatr Sci 27:381–392

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Chou P-H, Lin C-H, Cheng C et al (2015) Risk of depressive disorders in women undergoing hysterectomy: a population-based follow-up study. J Psychiatr Res 68:186–191

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Clarke-Pearson DL, Geller EJ (2013) Complications of hysterectomy. Obstet Gynecol 121:654–673

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Perri T, Harel G, Dadon T et al (2021) Frequency and prediction of deep uterine involvement in advanced high-grade epithelial ovarian cancer: is uterine preservation an option? Int J Gynecol Cancer 31:251–256

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Chitrathara K, Sheikh ZA, Vijaykumar DK et al (2011) Is hysterectomy needed in ovarian cancer? Indian J Cancer 48:471–476

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Behtash N, Karimi Zarchi M, Ashraf-Ganjoei T (2010) Uterine involvement in advanced epithelial ovarian cancer. Eur J Gynaecol Oncol 31:99–101

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Menczer J, Chetrit A, Sadetzki S (2010) Uterine metastases in ovarian carcinoma: frequency and survival in women who underwent hysterectomy. J Gynecol Oncol 21:191–195

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. Zamani N, Mousavi AS, Akhavan S et al (2021) Uterine involvement in epithelial ovarian cancer and its risk factors. J Ovarian Res 14:171

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  19. Nasioudis D, Mulugeta-Gordon L, McMinn E et al (2021) Oncologic outcomes of uterine preservation for pre-menopausal patients with stage II epithelial ovarian carcinoma. Int J Gynecol Cancer 31:480–483

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Nasioudis D, Mastroyannis SA, Haggerty AF et al (2020) Fertility preserving surgery for high-grade epithelial ovarian carcinoma confined to the ovary. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 248:63–70

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Brummer THI, Jalkanen J, Fraser J et al (2011) FINHYST, a prospective study of 5279 hysterectomies: complications and their risk factors. Hum Reprod Oxf Engl 26:1741–1751

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Phung TKT, Waltoft BL, Laursen TM et al (2010) Hysterectomy, oophorectomy and risk of dementia: a nationwide historical cohort study. Dement Geriatr Cogn Disord 30:43–50

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Rocca WA, Grossardt BR, Shuster LT et al (2012) Hysterectomy, oophorectomy, estrogen, and the risk of dementia. Neurodegener Dis 10:175–178

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  24. Harter P, Sehouli J, Lorusso D et al (2019) A randomized trial of lymphadenectomy in patients with advanced ovarian neoplasms. N Engl J Med 380:822–832

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

The authors declare that no funds, grants, or other support were received during the preparation of this manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Service de chirurgie cancérologique gynécologique et du sein, Hôpital Européen Georges-Pompidou, APHP, Paris, France

    Louise Benoit, Camille Pajot, Meriem Koual, Huyen-Thu Nguyen-Xuan, Enrica Bentivegna, Anne-Sophie Bats & Henri Azaïs

  2. Faculté de médecine Paris-Descartes, Université Paris Cité, Paris, France

    Louise Benoit, Meriem Koual, Anne-Sophie Bats & Henri Azaïs

  3. INSERM UMR-S 1124, Université de Paris, Centre Universitaire des Saints Pères, Paris, France

    Louise Benoit & Meriem Koual

  4. Centre de Recherche des Cordeliers, INSERM, CNRS, Sorbonne Université, USPC, Université Paris Descartes, Université Paris Diderot, Equipe labellisée Ligue Nationale contre le cancer, Paris, France

    Anne-Sophie Bats & Henri Azaïs

  5. Gynecologic and Breast Oncologic Surgery Department, European Georges Pompidou Hospital, 20 Rue Leblanc, 75015, Paris, France

    Louise Benoit

Authors
  1. Louise Benoit
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Camille Pajot
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Meriem Koual
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Huyen-Thu Nguyen-Xuan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Enrica Bentivegna
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Anne-Sophie Bats
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Henri Azaïs
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

LB: conceptualization, data curation, formal analysis, investigation, methodology, resources, software, supervision, validation, visualization, roles/writing—original draft, writing—review and editing. CP: conceptualization, data curation, formal analysis, investigation, methodology. MK, H-TN-X, EB, A-SB: conceptualization, methodology, supervision, validation, writing—review and editing. HA: conceptualization, formal analysis, investigation, methodology, supervision, validation, visualization, roles/writing—original draft.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Louise Benoit.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors have no relevant financial or non-financial interests to disclose.

Ethics approval

This study was performed in line with the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki. Approval was granted by the CEROG committee number: 2021-GYN-0504 (Comité d’Ethique de la Recherche Clinique en Obstétrique et Gynécologie).

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Benoit, L., Pajot, C., Koual, M. et al. Could uterine conservation be an option in presumed early-stage epithelial ovarian cancer?. Arch Gynecol Obstet 308, 953–960 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-023-07016-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-023-07016-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation