Search

International audience; Objective: To assess the surgical management and survival of severely obese patients with high-risk endometrial cancer.Materials and methods: Data from 269 patients with high-risk endometrial cancer who were treated between 2001 and 2018 were collected from a multicenter database (11 centers). We classified the patients according to their BMI and compared outcomes in two groups: a normal weight group of women with a BMI < 25 kg/m2, and a severe obesity group of women with a BMI ≥ 35 kg/m2. The groups were compared for epidemiologic, pathologic, management, relapse-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS) elements.Results: Patients in the severe obesity group were younger (64 years vs. 68 years, p < 0.05) and had more comorbidities (hypertension, diabetes). They also had more locally advanced tumors and pelvic lymph node involvement (47% vs 24%, p < 0.05). The severely obese patients were less likely to undergo recommended surgical staging, with fewer lumbar aortic dissections than women of normal weight (23% vs 36%, p < 0.05) and fewer pelvic sentinel lymph node biopsies (26.5% vs 12.1%, p < 0.05). No difference in RFS or OS were observed between the two groups.Conclusion: Patients with severe obesity and high-risk endometrial cancer have more locally advanced tumors, and are less likely to be managed according to surgical recommendations. However, RFS and OS do not seem to be affected.

International audience; OBJECTIVES: A recent randomized controlled trial has reconsidered the use of laparoscopy for treating patients with early-stage cervical cancer with radical hysterectomy (RH). We aimed to evaluate if surgical approach had an impact on surgical and oncological outcomes in these patients in a French setting. METHODS: Data of 1706 patients with cervical cancer treated between 1996 and 2017 were extracted from maintained databases of 9 French University hospitals. Patients, with FIGO stage IA2 to IIB tumors, treated by radical hysterectomy were selected for further analysis. A propensity score matching was used with a ratio of 2:1 in favor of laparoscopic approach was used. The Kaplan Meier method was used to estimate the survival distribution. RESULTS: 34 patients treated with laparotomy were matched with 61 patients treated by minimally invasive surgery (MIS). There was no difference regarding overall survival (91 % vs 81 %, p > 0.05) or disease-free survival (82 % vs 78 %, p > 0.05). There was no difference regarding surgical outcomes with no excess of postoperative complication in patients with MIS. Hospital stay was significantly longer in patients operated on laparotomy. CONCLUSION: In our study, there was no evidence of a difference in survival between minimally invasive surgery and laparotomy in patients treated with radical hysterectomy for early-stage cervical cancer.

Introduction Borderline ovarian tumors (BOTs) although rare, have shown an increase in the incidence worldwide. Although the survival rate is high, the recurrence rate is estimated to be between 5% and 34%. The objective of this study was to identify risk factors for recurrence of BOTs. Methods This retrospective multicenter study included 493 patients treated surgically for BOT between January 2001 and December 2018. Results Thirty-seven patients showed recurrence (group R, 7.5%), while 456 did not (group NR, 92.5%). With an average follow-up of 30.5 months (1-276), the overall recurrence rate was 7.5%. Recurrence rates for the BOT and invasive types were 5.7% (n = 28) and 1.4% (n = 7), respectively. The mean time to recurrence was 44.1 (3-251) months. Univariate analysis showed that age at diagnosis, type of surgical procedure, histological type, and FIGO stage were factors influencing recurrence. Multivariate analysis showed that the risk factors for recurrence of BOT were conservative treatment (OR = 7 [95% CI 3.01-16.23]; p Discussion To the best of our knowledge, this multicenter study was one of the largest studies on the risk factors for BOT recurrence. Conservative treatment and advanced FIGO stage were identified as risk factors for BOT recurrence. These results reinforce the need for restaging of patients who did not have an optimal initial surgical staging so as not to avoid missing a tumor in the advanced stage. Referral to a surgical oncology center is suggested to optimize overall patient management.

Objective The choice and use of a type of hygienic protection depends on many factors. Due to growing media interest, the field of hygienic protection is evolving, however, to date no study has been carried out on this subject in France. The objective of this study was to evaluate women's practices regarding the use of hygienic protection. Material and methods From 2 June 2019 to 4 January 2020, 1,153 patients responding to a self-report questionnaire were included in a prospective, cross-sectional, observational, single-centre study. The aim of the study was to describe women's practices with regard to menstrual hygiene products and the factors determining their choices, as well as their knowledge of the potential risks associated with these protections and their sources of information. Results Disposable sanitary pads were preferred by 930/1148 (81%) of patients, and menstrual tampons were used half as much (525/1150 (45.6%) of women surveyed)). The new menstrual hygiene products (washable sanitary pads, menstrual panties, and menstrual cups) were used by only 51/1150 (4.4%); 20/1149 (1.7%); 108/1150 (9.4%) of the patients; however, among the 92/1136 (8.1%) of the patients who had recently changed the type of protection, these new protections were the most popular because they were considered more ecological and less harmful to health. Menstrual hygiene products were perceived as a health risk for 924/1129 (81.8%) of patients. Menstrual toxic shock syndrome was knowledeg in only 473/1133 (41.7%) of patients. This lack of knowledge could lead to risky behaviour. The majority of patients said they were not informed about hygiene protection, with only 151//1108 (13.6%) having discussed the subject with a health professional, yet 973/1067 (91.2%) wanted more information. Conclusion This is the first French study on menstrual hygiene products. It showed that traditional sanitary protection was still the most widely used, but there was a growing awareness among patients about the products they used and their potential health risks as well as the consequences for the environment. Patients wanted to receive information on the subject from health professionals as well as manufacturers in order to be able to choose the product deemed the most suitable and in which they have confidence.

To compare postoperative pain after single port laparoscopy (SPL) approach with conventional laparoscopy (CL) in case of adnexectomy.This is a retrospective monocentric study involving patients who underwent adnexal surgery by SPL or CL for a suspected benign disease or as a preventive measure. The main outcome measure was the level of postoperative pain.A total of 87 patients were enrolled. Within 2h, the numerical scale (NS) was 1.9 in SPL group and 2.0 in the CL group (P=0.85). The next day, the NS was 1.8 in SPL group and 1.5 in CL group (P=0.55). The operating time was significantly shorter in SPL group (33 versus 56min, 95% CI [-31; -15], P0.001) and no rupture of ovarian cysts occurred in this group. There was no significant difference concerning complications, length of hospital stay, general satisfaction and POSAS (Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale) score.This study confirms the feasibility of single-port laparoscopic adnexectomy. We have not shown significant difference in postoperative pain but the operating time was significantly reduced under the guise of an experienced surgeon.

Objective To evaluate the knowledge of pregnant women and provide information about Down syndrome (DS) screening, including non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT). Materials and methods A prospective unicenter study of pregnant women recruited during their first trimester foetal ultrasound was carried out. Single pregnancies from 11 to 17 + 6 weeks of amenorrhoea (SA) without a history of DS were included. “Pre” and “post” questionnaire were fulfilled before and after the consultation. Patient characteristics, prior information, information provided during the consultation, and patient satisfaction were also analysed. Results A total of 273 were included in the study, and 147 completed surveys (pre and post) were examined. In pre-consultation, 82 % of women know that integrated screening includes maternal serum markers and nuchal translucency (n = 103). Concerning NIPT for DS, 8% (n = 11) of women declare having been informed before the ultrasound. A minority of patients know modalities of reimbursement (n = 33, 26 %) and invasive sampling is mandatory for diagnosis when NIPT is positive (n = 37, 28 %). Significant improvement in right answers was obtained for three questions: “nuchal translucency is included in the combined screening test for DS” (p = 0,007); “blood serum markers is included in the combined screening for DS” (p = 0,009) and advanced maternal age increases risk for DS” (p = 0,004). Total score in the post questionnaire was significantly higher than the “pre” consultation questionnaire (14,7 ± 2.8 versus 14,1 ± 2.9; p = 0.01). Conclusion Patients show a high level of knowledge on screening strategies for DS in pre-consultation. They benefit from the consultation on global knowledge, NIPT, and ultrasound notions.

We describe the first French patient treated for sclerosing peritonitis syndrome associated with lutheinized thecomas. At 42 years old, she had respiratory distress with increased abdominal volume. Physical examination revealed ascites, pleural effusions, and two mobile latero-uterine masses. Radiological examinations revealed bilateral ovarian masses of 10 cm. Bilateral adnexectomy was performed by laparotomy. Histological analysis concluded that there were benign luteinized thecomas. Until the 36th postoperative day, the general condition of the patient deteriorated to become critical. A second surgical procedure was attempted revealing sclerosing fibrosis preventing access to the peritoneal cavity. Subsequently, a medical treatment combining parenteral nutrition, high intravenous doses of corticosteroids, antiestrogens, colchicine and sandostatin was administered and effective allowing continuity recovery 15 months later. The clinical outcomes has been favorable at 24 month later.

Pelvic inflammatory diseases (PID) must be suspected when spontaneous pelvic pain is associated with induced adnexal or uterine pain (grade B). Pelvic ultrasonography is necessary to rule out tubo-ovarian abscess (TOA) (grade C). Microbiological diagnosis requires endocervical and TOA sampling for molecular and bacteriological analysis (grade B). First-line treatment for uncomplicated PID combines ceftriaxone 1 g, once, IM or IV, doxycycline 100 mg ×2/day, and metronidazole 500 mg ×2/day PO for 10 days (grade A). First-line treatment for complicated PID combines IV ceftriaxone 1-2 g/day until clinical improvement, doxycycline 100 mg ×2/day, IV or PO, and metronidazole 500 mg ×3/day, IV or PO for 14 days (grade B). Drainage of TOA is indicated if the pelvic fluid collection measures more than 3 cm (grade B). Follow-up is required in women with sexually transmitted infections (STIs) (grade C). The use of condoms is recommended (grade B). Vaginal sampling for microbiological diagnosis is recommended 3-6 months after PID (grade C), before the insertion of an intrauterine device (grade B), and before elective termination of pregnancy or hysterosalpingography. When specific bacteria are identified, antibiotics targeted at them are preferable to systematic antibiotic prophylaxis.

Introduction In the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, specific recommendations are required for the management of patients with gynecologic cancer. Materials and method The FRANCOGYN group of the National College of French Gynecologists and Obstetricians (CNGOF) convened to develop recommendations based on the consensus conference model. Results If a patient with a gynecologic cancer presents with COVID-19, surgical management should be postponed for at least 15 days. For cervical cancer, radiotherapy and concomitant radiochemotherapy could replace surgery as first-line treatment and the value of lymph node staging should be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. For advanced ovarian cancers, neoadjuvant chemotherapy should be preferred over primary cytoreduction surgery. It is legitimate not to perform hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy during the COVID-19 pandemic. For patients who are scheduled to undergo interval surgery, chemotherapy can be continued and surgery performed after 6 cycles. For patients with early stage endometrial cancer of low and intermediate preoperative ESMO risk, hysterectomy with bilateral adnexectomy combined with a sentinel lymph node procedure is recommended. Surgery can be postponed for 1–2 months in low-risk endometrial cancers (FIGO Ia stage on MRI and grade 1–2 endometrioid cancer on endometrial biopsy). For patients of high ESMO risk, the MSKCC algorithm (combining PET-CT and sentinel lymph node biopsy) should be applied to avoid pelvic and lumbar-aortic lymphadenectomy. Conclusion During the COVID-19 pandemic, management of a patient with cancer should be adapted to limit the risks associated with the virus without incurring loss of chance.

Endometriosis is a common condition that causes pain and infertility. It can lead to absenteeism and also to multiple surgeries with a consequent risk of impaired fertility, and constitutes a major public health cost. Despite the existence of numerous national and international guidelines, the management of endometriosis remains suboptimal. To address this issue, the French College of Gynaecologists and Obstetricians (CNGOF) and the Society of Gynaecological and Pelvic Surgery (SCGP) convened a committee of experts tasked with defining the criteria for establishing a system of care networks, headed by Expert Centres, covering all of mainland France and its overseas territories. This document sets out the criteria for the designation of Expert Centres. It will serve as a guide for the authorities concerned, to ensure that the means are provided to adequately manage patients with endometriosis.