ArticleFrontiers in oncology2024
Incidental findings of borderline ovarian tumor or ovarian cancer - real-world data on surgical and oncological outcomes.
Article in Frontiers in oncology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Centralization of ovarian cancer treatment is associated with higher rates of optimal surgery and longer survival. However, preoperative diagnosis of ovarian cancer is challenging and some diagnoses are made incidentally after surgery. This study investigated the surgical and oncological outcomes of patients with incidental findings of borderline ovarian tumors or ovarian cancer who were centralized postoperatively and treated with a two-stage surgical procedure, and compared these with those of patients with adnexal masses of suspected malignancy who were offered a single-stage surgical procedure with intraoperative frozen section in a tertiary hospital. Methods: A database of 390 patients with adnexal masses and surgical treatment at the Bern University Hospital, Switzerland was retrospectively reviewed to identify patients with borderline ovarian tumors or ovarian cancer between 2010 and 2020. Results: Among 390 patients with adnexal masses, 223 were diagnosed with a borderline ovarian tumor or ovarian cancer. Compared with patients with suspected malignancy and a centralized single-stage surgical procedure, patients with an incidental postoperative malignancy diagnosis and a two-stage surgical procedure underwent more surgical interventions (1.3 vs. 2.1 p<.001) and had a longer time interval from diagnosis to initiation of chemotherapy (33.3 vs. 45.1 p=.005) and to completion of surgical cytoreduction (31.9 vs. 73.7 days, p<.001). However, there were no differences in the rates of complete cytoreduction (90.0% vs. 93.2%, p=.719), intraoperative (11.3% vs. 13.7%, p=.664) or postoperative (38.7% vs. 37.0%, p=.884) complication rates, and number of hospitalization days (11.1 vs. 12.0 days, p=.369). An incidental diagnosis of malignancy with postoperative referral was neither associated with an increased risk of recurrence (hazard ratio (HR) 0.8, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.6-1.8, p=.839) nor death (HR 0.7, 95% CI 0.4-1.1, p=.113), and there was no difference in mean recurrence-free survival between the study subgroups. Discussion: Although patients with incidental findings of borderline ovarian tumors or ovarian cancer treated with a two-stage surgical procedure had a longer time to completion of surgical staging and initiation of chemotherapy, our results showed no negative impact on oncological outcomes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.