ArticleArchives of gynecology and obstetrics2026
Management of incidental STIC lesions with and without BRCA mutations: a survey of current clinical practice in Austria, Germany, and Switzerland.
Article in Archives of gynecology and obstetrics, 2026. 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe aim of this study was to assess current clinical practices, management, and follow-up care for women with an isolated serous tubal intraepithelial carcinoma (STIC) diagnosis in German-speaking countries.
methodsAn online survey targeting all German-speaking gynecological centers was developed. The survey included single- and multiple-choice questions on hospital data, such as the number of cases per year and certification, as well as detailed questions on two scenarios: a BRCA1-positive patient undergoing prophylactic bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy and a patient with an incidental STIC finding after hysterectomy and bilateral salpingectomy.
resultsThis survey was answered by 77 physicians. For a patient with a known BRCA1 mutation and STIC, 89.29% of respondents would perform further diagnostics. The most frequent diagnostic steps would be a CA-125 test (83.64%) and a CT abdomen (63.64%). Further surgery would be performed by 77.78% of respondents, including 75.93% without and 5.56% with lymph node staging. 79.25% would prefer laparoscopic surgery. The majority (90.57%) would not recommend adjuvant therapy. In a patient without a known mutation and STIC, 88.46% of respondents would recommend further examinations. 58.82% would carry out genetic panel testing. Another subsequent surgery would be performed by 76.47%, with 66.67% planning to perform surgery without lymph node staging. 53.06% of respondents would follow up patients for five years. Percentages are reported based on the number of valid responses for each item.
conclusionThis survey demonstrates differences in the clinical management of isolated STIC across German-speaking countries, highlighting discrepancies between guideline recommendations and real-world practices. THIS STUDY IS REGISTERED IN THE GERMAN CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTER UNDER : DRKS00033112.
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.