Obstetrics & Gynecology Email Alerts
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

Obstetrics & Gynecology 1998;92:967-971
© 1998 by The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Lehner, R
Right arrow Articles by Sevelda, P
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Lehner, R
Right arrow Articles by Sevelda, P

Articles

Influence of delayed staging laparotomy after laparoscopic removal of ovarian masses later found malignant

R Lehner, R Wenzl, H Heinzl, P Husslein, and P Sevelda

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether delayed laparotomy after attempted laparoscopic excision of an ovarian mass later found to be malignant has an impact on the stage of disease. METHODS: A questionnaire regarding laparoscopic management of ovarian masses later found to be malignant was mailed to all gynecologic departments in Austria. Of the 70 cases reported, laparotomy was performed after laparoscopy in 48 cases. In 24 of these cases, laparotomy was performed within 17 days of laparoscopy, whereas 24 cases involved a delay of more than 17 days. Twenty-two patients in whom laparotomy was performed immediately after laparoscopy were used as controls. RESULTS: In patients with borderline tumors who underwent laparotomy more than 17 days after laparoscopy, the odds ratio (OR) for International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) stage IIB-IV disease was 5.3 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.40, infinity), compared with patients undergoing immediate laparotomy (multivariate analysis). Patients with invasive ovarian cancer who underwent laparotomy more than 17 days after laparoscopy had an OR of 9.2 (CI 0.92, 481) for stage IIB-IV disease compared with patients undergoing immediate laparotomy (multivariate analysis). In patients with borderline tumors, multivariate analysis showed that the timing of laparotomy is an independent prognostic factor for the stage of disease. In invasive ovarian cancer, none of the factors evaluated by multivariate analysis was found to be an independent prognostic factor for the distribution of disease stage. A delay between laparoscopy and laparotomy may affect adversely the distribution of disease stage. CONCLUSION: The timing of subsequent laparotomy was found to be a factor predictive of the distribution of disease stage.


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Obstet GynecolHome page
L. Hefler, H. Leipold, S. Hinterberger, N. Concin, R. Klotz, and A. Reinthaller
Influence of the Time Interval Between Hysteroscopy, Dilation and Curettage, and Hysterectomy on Survival in Patients With Endometrial Cancer
Obstet. Gynecol., November 1, 2008; 112(5): 1098 - 1101.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Obstet GynecolHome page
R. Sagiv, A. Golan, and M. Glezerman
Laparoscopic Management of Extremely Large Ovarian Cysts
Obstet. Gynecol., June 1, 2005; 105(6): 1319 - 1322.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 RadioGraphicsHome page
Y.-Y. Jeong, E. K. Outwater, and H. K. Kang
Imaging Evaluation of Ovarian Masses
RadioGraphics, September 1, 2000; 20(5): 1445 - 1470.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1998 by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists.