Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30411170›Full record

ReviewCurrent treatment options in oncology2018

Novel Surgical Strategies in the Treatment of Gynecological Malignancies.

Martina Aida Angeles, Carlos Martínez-Gómez, Federico Migliorelli, Marie Voglimacci, Justine Figurelli, Stephanie Motton, Yann Tanguy Le Gac, Gwénaël Ferron, Alejandra Martinez

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Current treatment options in oncology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 13% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Climacteric symptoms in postoperative patients among endometrial cancer, cervical cancer, and ovarian cancer: a cross-sectional study.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2022
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.

Martina Aida AngelesDepartment of Surgical Oncology, Institut Claudius Regaud-Institut Universitaire du Cancer de Toulouse (IUCT)-Oncopole, 1 avenue Irène Joliot-Curie, 31059, Toulouse Cedex 9, France.
Carlos Martínez-GómezDepartment of Surgical Oncology, Institut Claudius Regaud-Institut Universitaire du Cancer de Toulouse (IUCT)-Oncopole, 1 avenue Irène Joliot-Curie, 31059, Toulouse Cedex 9, France.
Federico MigliorelliInstitute Clinic of Gynecology, Obstetrics and Neonatology, Hospital Clínic de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.
Marie VoglimacciDepartment of Surgical Oncology, Institut Claudius Regaud-Institut Universitaire du Cancer de Toulouse (IUCT)-Oncopole, 1 avenue Irène Joliot-Curie, 31059, Toulouse Cedex 9, France.
Justine FigurelliDepartment of Surgical Oncology, Institut Claudius Regaud-Institut Universitaire du Cancer de Toulouse (IUCT)-Oncopole, 1 avenue Irène Joliot-Curie, 31059, Toulouse Cedex 9, France.
Stephanie MottonDepartment of Surgical Oncology, CHU Toulouse-Institut Universitaire du Cancer de Toulouse (IUCT)-Oncopole, Toulouse, France.
Yann Tanguy Le GacDepartment of Surgical Oncology, CHU Toulouse-Institut Universitaire du Cancer de Toulouse (IUCT)-Oncopole, Toulouse, France.
Gwénaël FerronDepartment of Surgical Oncology, Institut Claudius Regaud-Institut Universitaire du Cancer de Toulouse (IUCT)-Oncopole, 1 avenue Irène Joliot-Curie, 31059, Toulouse Cedex 9, France.
Alejandra MartinezDepartment of Surgical Oncology, Institut Claudius Regaud-Institut Universitaire du Cancer de Toulouse (IUCT)-Oncopole, 1 avenue Irène Joliot-Curie, 31059, Toulouse Cedex 9, France. Martinez.Alejandra@iuct-oncopole.fr.
Institut Claudius Regaud · FRCentre de Recherche en Cancérologie de Toulouse · FRInstitut universitaire du cancer de Toulouse Oncopole · FRHospital Clínic de Barcelona · ESInserm · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

opinion statementThe main advancement in the surgical treatment of early cervical cancer has been a de-escalation in the radical surgical approach of early stage disease. Similarly, sentinel lymph node detection with cervical tracer injection can be performed alone in microscopic tumors (stage IA) while additional lymphadenectomy is still performed in macroscopic tumors (IB1 and IIA). Parametrial resection has been progressively reduced in tumors less than 2 cm, and simple procedures, conservative (trachelectomy) or not (simple hysterectomy), are currently being evaluated in several phase III trials. Since the preliminary results of the LACC (locally advanced cervical cancer) trial, the value of minimally invasive surgery as the standard approach for the treatment of early stage cervical cancer has been questioned and patients should be aware when discussing the approach for radical hysterectomy. While awaiting the results of ongoing clinical trials comparing radiological and surgical staging in locally advanced cervical cancer patients, surgical staging with paraaortic lymphadenectomy remains the standard of care before definitive chemoradiotherapy in patients with negative aortic PET/TDM. Patients undergoing salvage surgeries for isolated pelvic recurrences of cervical cancer benefit from advanced reconstructive techniques as DIEP flaps and continent reconstructive urinary techniques. In selected patients, a minimally invasive approach can be considered. Surgery is the mainstay of the treatment of endometrial cancer. The major evolution in surgical strategy has occurred in lymph node staging. The standard surgical staging includes pelvic and paraaortic lymph node dissection to the level of the left renal vein. Sentinel lymph node dissection has been validated as a less morbid alternative of systematic lymphadenectomy, indicated in patients with low and intermediate risk of lymph node involvement. In advanced ovarian cancer, complete cytoreduction is the main objective of surgery. To achieve this goal, upper abdominal complex procedures have been developed. Best survival rates are obtained with primary debulking surgery. Exploratory laparoscopy may be performed before cytoreduction to evaluate resectability and thus avoid unnecessary laparotomy. Although systematic pelvic and paraaortic lymphadenectomy is being questioned in patients with advanced ovarian cancer and clinically negative lymph nodes undergoing complete primary debulking surgery, this procedure is still recommended. While waiting publication of the GOG 252 trial, IP chemotherapy after complete CRS is under debate. HIPEC after interval debulking surgery in patients undergoing complete cytoreduction is an intriguing new option. Patients within the first recurrence of ovarian cancer, with score AGO-positive, benefit from a second complete cytoreductive surgery followed by chemotherapy. Ovarian cancer survival rates are higher in specialized high-volume centers, and thus cases should be centralized and quality indicators used.

Indexed as

Cytoreduction Surgical ProceduresEndometrial NeoplasmsFemaleHumansLymphatic MetastasisLymph Node ExcisionLymph NodesMinimally Invasive Surgical ProceduresOvarian NeoplasmsSentinel Lymph NodeUterine Cervical NeoplasmsCervical cancerEndometrial cancerMinimally invasive surgeryNovel strategiesOvarian cancerSurgical approach

Identifiers

PMID30411170
OpenAlexW2900424879

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.