Borderline tumours of the ovary: Common practice in the Netherlands.
Borderline tumours of the ovary
Frozen section analysis
Gynaecologic oncologist
Questionnaire
Semi-specialized gynaecologists
Staging procedure
Journal
Gynecologic oncology reports
ISSN: 2352-5789
Titre abrégé: Gynecol Oncol Rep
Pays: Netherlands
ID NLM: 101652231
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Feb 2019
Feb 2019
Historique:
received:
19
11
2018
accepted:
09
12
2018
entrez:
25
12
2018
pubmed:
26
12
2018
medline:
26
12
2018
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Discordance between frozen section diagnosis and the definite histopathological diagnosis and the fact that the frozen section result is not always unambiguous, may contribute to differences in clinical practice regarding perioperative treatment and follow-up of borderline ovarian tumours (BOTs) patients amongst gynaecologic oncologists, which may lead to over- and undertreatment. The aim of the study was to map the Dutch gynaecologists' preferred treatment and follow-up strategy in case of BOTs. A questionnaire was sent to all Dutch gynaecologists involved in ovarian surgery with perioperative frozen section analysis, and the outcomes were assessed using descriptive statistics. Nearly half of the respondents (41.0%) would not perform a staging procedure in case of a BOT. In case of an ambiguous frozen section diagnosis, tending towards invasive carcinoma, a considerable number (sBOT 56.4%; mBOT 30.8%) would perform a lymph node sampling as part of the staging procedure. A relaparotomy/relaparoscopy, to perform a lymph node sampling in case of a serous or mucinous carcinoma after a BOT frozen section diagnosis, would be performed by 97.4% and 48.7% of the respondents, respectively. A considerable number of gynaecologists would perform a staging procedure that is recommended for ovarian cancer in case of an ambiguous BOT frozen section diagnosis, especially for serous tumours. In addition, nearly all gynaecologists would perform a second procedure including a lymph node sampling in case of a serous invasive carcinoma after a BOT frozen section diagnosis, which applies to half of the gynaecologists in case of a mucinous carcinoma.
Identifiants
pubmed: 30581952
doi: 10.1016/j.gore.2018.12.004
pii: S2352-5789(18)30115-2
pmc: PMC6297066
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
25-30Références
Gynecol Oncol. 2000 Jul;78(1):7-9
pubmed: 10873401
Gynecol Oncol. 2001 Jan;80(1):56-61
pubmed: 11136570
Gynecol Oncol. 2001 Apr;81(1):63-6
pubmed: 11277651
J Clin Oncol. 2001 May 15;19(10):2658-64
pubmed: 11352957
Gynecol Oncol. 2002 Jul;86(1):34-7
pubmed: 12079297
Ann Oncol. 2003 Apr;14(4):592-8
pubmed: 12649107
Cancer. 2004 Mar 1;100(5):1045-52
pubmed: 14983501
Cancer. 2004 Mar 15;100(6):1145-51
pubmed: 15022280
Eur J Cancer. 2004 Aug;40(12):1842-9
pubmed: 15288285
J Med Internet Res. 2004 Sep 29;6(3):e34
pubmed: 15471760
Int J Gynecol Pathol. 2005 Jan;24(1):4-25
pubmed: 15626914
Gynecol Oncol. 2005 May;97(2):400-4
pubmed: 15863136
Br J Cancer. 2006 Jun 5;94(11):1586-91
pubmed: 16685277
Obstet Gynecol. 2007 Jan;109(1):12-9
pubmed: 17197582
Gynecol Oncol. 2007 Jun;105(3):604-8
pubmed: 17321572
J Clin Oncol. 2007 Jul 10;25(20):2928-37
pubmed: 17617524
Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2008 May-Jun;18(3):453-9
pubmed: 18476948
Obstet Gynecol. 2010 Aug;116(2 Pt 1):269-73
pubmed: 20664385
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2011 Sep;38(3):246-66
pubmed: 21898632
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2012 Jan;39(1):99-105
pubmed: 21913276
Gynecol Oncol. 2011 Dec;123(3):610-4
pubmed: 21982047
Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2012 Mar;22(3):400-6
pubmed: 22246404
Virchows Arch. 2012 Mar;460(3):237-49
pubmed: 22322322
Lancet Oncol. 2012 Mar;13(3):e103-15
pubmed: 22381933
Ann Oncol. 2012 Sep;23 Suppl 10:x111-7
pubmed: 22987944
Oncologist. 2012;17(12):1515-33
pubmed: 23024155
Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2013 Mar;167(1):86-9
pubmed: 23219291
Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2014 Jun;24(5):874-9
pubmed: 24844221
Oncologist. 2015 Feb;20(2):151-8
pubmed: 25601963
Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2015 Mar;186:26-33
pubmed: 25602531
J Obstet Gynaecol. 2016 Jul;36(5):626-30
pubmed: 26790979
Gynecol Oncol. 2016 Jul;142(1):50-53
pubmed: 27168006
Eur J Cancer. 2016 Oct;66:83-90
pubmed: 27536891
J Exp Ther Oncol. 2016 Nov;11(4):245-250
pubmed: 27849334
Gynecol Oncol. 2017 Feb;144(2):285-289
pubmed: 27889017
Gynecol Oncol. 2017 Feb;144(2):414-419
pubmed: 27908528
Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2018 Jan;28(1):92-98
pubmed: 29194190
Int J Mol Sci. 2018 May 24;19(6):null
pubmed: 29795040
Gynecol Oncol. 1993 Nov;51(2):236-43
pubmed: 8276300
Gynecol Oncol. 1997 Jun;65(3):467-72
pubmed: 9190977