Use of second-look laparotomy in the management of patients with ovarian epithelial malignancies |
| |
Authors: | E S Podczaski C W Stevens A Manetta C W Whitney J E Larson R Mortel |
| |
Institution: | Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Milton S. Hershey Medical Center, Pennsylvania State University, Hershey 17033. |
| |
Abstract: | Between June 1976 and January 1986, 94 evaluable patients with stage I-IV disease underwent second-look laparotomy as part of their treatment for ovarian epithelial carcinomas. Stage and residual tumor size after initial debulking surgery demonstrated a significant association with absence of disease at reexploration. Forty-nine patients (52%) had no evidence of disease at second-look laparotomy. Thirty patients (32%) had macroscopic residual tumor, and 15 patients (16%) had microscopic disease at reexploration. Patients with a negative second-look laparotomy had an excellent prognosis; uncorrected 2- and 5-year survival rates exceed 90%. None of the patients with stage I or II disease developed recurrent tumor after a negative second-look laparotomy. However, 7 of the 25 (28%) patients with stage III disease and a negative second-look have demonstrated recurrent carcinomas. Recurrences were documented from 15.4 to 51.7 months after second-look laparotomy and were located within the abdominal cavity. Life table methods demonstrated improved survival for patients with microscopic disease as compared to those with gross tumor at second-look survey. Both groups had similar mean patient ages and tumor stage distributions. Patients with microscopic residual disease had uncorrected 2- and 5-year survival rates of 76 and 64%. The 2-year uncorrected survival rate for patients with gross tumor at second-look laparotomy was 25%. Thirty patients with macroscopic disease at second-look laparotomy underwent a repeat attempt at tumor debulking. Seventeen patients completed second-look surgery with residual disease less than 1 cm in maximum dimensions. Life table methods demonstrated improved survival when residual disease was less than 1 cm. Regardless of residual tumor size after reexploration, patients with gross tumor had a worse survival than those with microscopic disease. |
| |
Keywords: | |
|
|