Search

Simple Summary: Ovarian cancer, which is resistant to platinum-based chemotherapy, has limited therapeutic options, and there is uncertainty over the role of surgery to remove all visible tumour cells (cytoreductive surgery), and its survival benefits. We performed a systematic review to evaluate the oncological benefit of this surgery in patients with platinum-resistant ovarian cancer and the associated surgical morbidity and mortality. Although evidence is limited, surgery appears to prolong survival in these patients, particularly with isolated recurrences and where there has been a full resection of all visible tumour. However, surgery is associated with substantial risks and limited benefits when all visible tumours cannot be removed. There is a need for prospective clinical trials in these patients. Background/Objective: Platinum-resistant ovarian cancer (PROC) has limited therapeutic options, and the role of cytoreductive surgery (CRS) in improving survival outcomes remains uncertain. We performed a systematic review to evaluate the oncological benefit of CRS on PROC patients and the associated surgical morbidity and mortality. Methods: We followed a prospective protocol according to PRISMA guidelines. We searched PubMed, Medline, and Embase till October 2024. We used a "Population Intervention Comparator Outcomes (PICO)" framework. Our population included women with epithelial PROC who underwent CRS with/without chemotherapy. Our outcomes included overall survival (OS), progression-free-survival (PFS), post-operative morbidity and mortality and Quality of Life. Results: Our search yielded 6590 citations; six studies (N = 155 patients) were included. There is limited evidence available on the role of CRS in PROC, with notable variation in reported outcomes and outcomes' measures; therefore, we were unable to perform quantitative synthesis. CRS demonstrated survival benefits in well-selected PROC patients, particularly those with limited, isolated recurrences, low tumour burden, and good performance status. Complete resection (R0) was associated with significantly longer OS/PFS compared to those who had suboptimal surgeries (R1/R2). Conclusions: CRS seems to extend survival in carefully selected PROC patients, especially those with limited disease spread and favourable surgical profiles. Nevertheless, CRS carries substantial surgical risks, and its benefits appear contingent upon achieving R0. Further prospective trials with standardised patient selection criteria are needed to define CRS's role in PROC. At present, CRS in PROC should be considered within a multidisciplinary approach in specialised gynaecological oncology centres, with the careful assessment of patient-specific risk factors and potential for R0 resection. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

ABSTRACT: Objective: The objective of the study was to evaluate the efficacy of outpatient MyoSure procedures and their cost-effectiveness. Design: A retrospective analysis of patients who had outpatient MyoSure procedures from November 2019 to November 2020. Subjects and Methods: Data were collected retrospectively from electronic patient records (hysteroscopy reports, clinic notes, clinic letters, and histopathology results) from November 2019 to November 2020 and analyzed using Microsoft Excel and SPSS software. Results: Fifty-eight outpatient MyoSure procedures were performed from November 2019 to November 2020. The mean age was 53.13 years (22–81 years) and the mean body mass index was 29.65 kg/m2 (18–51 kg/m2). We found that our service has a success rate of 93.1% (54/58), a completion rate of 92.59% (50/58), and a discharge rate of 82.75% (48/58). The complete resection rate for polyps was 100% and for fibroids, it was 76.47%. When compared to the same procedure performed under general or regional anesthesia in a day surgery setting, an outpatient MyoSure procedure saves around 1117 GBP per procedure, for the Trust. We have compared data for the first 6 months to the following 6-month period. There were significant improvements in the success rate, completion rate, and discharge rate, also accompanied by a reduced complication rate. This is likely due to improved operators' experience in performing the procedure, and also the increased use of local anesthetic injection and cervical dilatation. Conclusions: Outpatient MyoSure procedures are feasible, efficacious, safe, acceptable, and cost-effective. The use of local anesthetic and cervical dilation has been associated with improved success rates. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: To find out effect of serum luteinizing hormone (LH) levels on Day 1 (Day 2 of cycle) and Day 5 of stimulation and Day of trigger hCG in controlled ovulation stimulation with antagonist protocol of IVF-ICSI cycle on cycle outcome. Materials and Methods: This retrospective study was conducted in a University Hospital setting. One hundred and 62 patients underwent 165 cycles of controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) with recombinant Follicle stimulating hormone (rFSH) and Gonadotropin releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist protocol in one year were included. Serum LH levels estimated on Day 1, Day 5 and the day of trigger hCG injections were divided into three groups based on the percentile and outcome measured. Results: The average number of follicles >18 mm in size were significant in the patients with LH levels between 25th to 75th percentile group on Day 1, Day 5 and Day of trigger hCG. The fertilization rate was significant (p= 0.04) in the patients with LH levels < 25thpercentile on the day of trigger hCG. Oocyte recovery rate, oocyte maturation rate and average number of best quality embryos (Grade 1) were not affected significantly in all three groups. Conclusion: In GnRH antagonist and rFSH protocols, low serum LH concentrations on the day of trigger hCG has better fertilization rate. LH levels between 25th and 75th percentile have an influence on the average number of > 18 mm size follicles. However, the LH level on Day 1, Day 5 and Day of hCG does not affect the cycle outcome in COS with antagonist protocol of IVF cycle. Hence, LH estimation is not mandatory in ART cycles with GnRH antagonist protocol. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]