Robotic interval debulking surgery for advanced epithelial ovarian cancer: current challenge or future direction? A systematic review

Robotic surgery in early and advanced ovarian cancer: Case selection for surgical staging and interval debulking surgery

OBJECTIVE

During the last decade several case series have been published on robotic surgery in early and advanced stage ovarian cancer. Although most studies lack a significant oncological follow-up, more importantly criteria for patient selection for both robotic surgical staging (R-SS) and robotic interval debulking surgery (R-IDS) are not well defined. The objective of this study was to assess the surgical and oncological outcomes, using well-defined selection criteria, between robotic and open surgery in early and advanced stage ovarian cancer.

STUDY DESIGN

Single-center retrospective case cohort study including 96 ovarian cancer patients. For early stage ovarian cancer, patients were selected for R-SS after laparoscopic salpingo-oophorectomy of a suspicious adnexal mass. For advanced stage ovarian cancer, only patients receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy and IDS were included in the study. Exclusion criteria were the presence of residual peritoneal disease after NACT and/or patients requiring additional complex surgical procedures.

RESULTS

For early stage ovarian cancer, similar median operative times were seen between R-SS and open surgical staging (O-SS), 132 min and 120 min respectively. Pelvic/para-aortic lymph node yield was similar between R-SS and O-SS, 22/11 nodes and 18/8 nodes respectively. Surgical upstaging occurred in 11.5% in the R-SS group and in 27.6% in the O-SS group. In advanced stage ovarian cancer, the BMI was significantly higher in the R-IDS group compared to the O-IDS group (27.8 vs 23.5; p =.006). The median follow was 52 months in the R-IDS group and 31 months in the O-IDS group. Recurrent disease occurred in 42.9% of the R-IDS group and in 45% of the O-IDS group. The length of hospitalization was significantly longer in the O-SS and O-IDS group (p <.00001).

CONCLUSION

Patients with clinically early stage ovarian cancer, confirmed after laparoscopic removal of a suspicious adnexal mass, are candidates for R-SS whilst maintaining similar surgical and oncological outcome measures as O-SS. In advanced ovarian cancer, suitable candidates for R-IDS are those who receive NACT with good response and no residual peritoneal disease, especially in patients with a high BMI, but large prospective randomized trials with well-defined criteria are needed.

Complete Laparoscopic Interval Debulking Surgery for Advanced Ovarian Cancer Achieves Similar Survival Outcomes to Open Approach: A Propensity-Matched Study

Background: To assess the laparoscopic interval debulking surgery (IDS) outcomes compared to laparotomy, by analyzing the overall survival (OS) and the progression free survival (PFS), as well as the intra- and post-operative morbidity.Methods: In this retrospective propensity-score-matched cohort study, all patients with stage III or IV FIGO (International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics) serous ovarian cancer, undergoing complete IDS after neoadjuvant chemotherapy, from January 1st of 2009 to June 1st 2019, were included.Results: Thirty-seven patients were included in the laparoscopy group and 40 in the laparotomy group. There was no significant difference in terms of median OS between laparoscopy and laparotomy (23.1 months [95% CI 15.7-29.7] versus 26.3 months [95% CI 21.7-31.7], respectively, p = 0.17) and median PFS (14.8 months [95% CI 10.6-21.5] versus 12 months [95% CI 11-15.1], p = 0.057). After applying the propensity score, 25 patients were included in each group. Laparoscopy was associated with significantly less early postoperative complications (6 versus 17, p = 0.01) and shorter hospital stay (7.6 days versus 12.1, p < 0.001) and a significantly better OS (HR 0.45 [95% CI 0.19-0.95], p = 0.04), but with no significant difference in terms of PFS (HR 0.71 [95% CI 0.27-1.88], p = 0.49).Conclusion: In carefully-selected patients with advanced ovarian cancer, complete laparoscopic interval debulking surgery achieves similar survival outcomes to open laparotomy. Therefore, laparoscopy appears as a safe alternative to laparotomy for IDS after NACT in selected patients with advanced ovarian cancer and a low burden of disease.

Nomogram to predict feasibility of minimally invasive interval debulking surgery in advanced ovarian cancer

OBJECTIVE

Currently, there is no clear guidance defining the ideal candidate for minimally invasive interval debulking surgery. This study aimed to identify predictive factors for a minimally invasive approach in patients with advanced ovarian cancer who are candidates for interval debulking surgery after neoadjuvant chemotherapy.

METHODS

This was a single institution retrospective study conducted between January 2014 and June 2020 Perioperative variables were used to predict the likelihood of minimally invasive interval debulking surgery using multivariable models. A nomogram was developed, and internal validation was performed using the bootstrapping correction technique. This nomogram was built to visualize the effect of perioperative variables on the estimated probability of minimally invasive interval debulking surgery in patients with a clinical response after neoadjuvant chemotherapy. We used the four significant perioperative variables according to logistic regression.

RESULTS

A total of 108 (28.4%) and 272 (71.6%) patients underwent interval debulking surgery by a minimally invasive or open approach, respectively. Absence of omental cake (odds ratio (OR) 9.15, 95% confidence interval (CI) 4.26 to 19.64, p<0.001), high volume surgeon (OR 5.43, 95% CI 2.75 to 10.71, p<0.001), less than two peritoneal sites involved (OR 2.94, 95% CI 1.34 to 6.43, p=0.007), and CA125 normalization (OR 1.79, 95% CI 1.05 to 3.36, p=0.049) correlated with the feasibility of minimally invasive interval debulking surgery at multivariate analysis. The calibration plot demonstrated good agreement between the predicted and actual probability of minimally invasive interval debulking surgery (p=0.93, Hosmer-Lemeshow test).

CONCLUSIONS

Our nomogram may serve as a useful tool to choose the surgical approach in patients with advanced ovarian cancer undergoing interval debulking surgery.