Article Text

Download PDFPDF

#845 Clinicopathologic and surgical analysis of 1090 patients with borderline ovarian tumors: a turkish society gynecologic oncology (TRSGO) multi-institutional retrospective trial
  1. Tevfik Guvenal1,
  2. Fuat Demirkiran2,
  3. Erkan Simsek3,
  4. Yakup Yalcin4,
  5. Ghanim Khatib5,
  6. Sevki Goksun Gokulu6,
  7. Tayup Simsek7,
  8. Kenan Dolapcioglu8,
  9. Anil Onan9,
  10. Nejat Ozgul10,
  11. Firat Ortac11,
  12. Hasan Yuksel12,
  13. Aytekin Altintas13,
  14. Banu Boso14,
  15. Sevtap Seyfettinoglu15,
  16. Cetin Celik16,
  17. Isin Ureyen17,
  18. Ibrahim Yalcin18,
  19. Kemal Gungorduk19,
  20. Baki Senturk20 and
  21. Ali Ayhan21
  1. 1Manisa Celal Bayar University, Dept. Gynecologic Oncology, Manisa, Turkey
  2. 2Istanbul University Cerrahpasa Medical School, Dept. Gynecologic Oncology, I?stanbul, Turkey
  3. 3Bakirkoy Dr. Sadi Konuk Education and Training Hospital, Dept. Gynecologic Oncology, I?stanbul, Turkey
  4. 4Uludag University School of Medicine, Dept. Gynecologic Oncology, Bursa, Turkey
  5. 5Cukurova University School of Medicine, Dept. Gynecologic Oncology, Adana, Turkey
  6. 6Mersin University School of Medicine, Dept. Gynecologic Oncology, Mersin, Turkey
  7. 7Akdeniz University School of Medicine, Dept. Gynecologic Oncology, Antalya, Turkey
  8. 8Mustafa Kemal University School of Medicine, Dept. Gynecologic Oncology, Hatay, Turkey
  9. 9Gazi University School of Medicine, Dept. Gynecologic Oncology, Ankara, Turkey
  10. 10Hacettepe University School of Medicine, Dept. Gynecologic Oncology, Ankara, Turkey
  11. 11Ankara University School of Medicine, Dept. Gynecologic Oncology, Ankara, Turkey
  12. 12Adnan Menderes University School of Medicine, Dept. Gynecologic Oncology, Aydin, Turkey
  13. 13Private Clinic, Adana, Turkey
  14. 14Baskent University School of Medicine, Adana Campus, Dept. Gynecologic Oncology, Adana, Turkey
  15. 15Adana City Hospital, Dept. Gynecologic Oncology, Adana, Turkey
  16. 16Selcuk University School of Medicine, Dept. Gynecologic Oncology, Konya, Turkey
  17. 17Antalya City Hospital, Dept. Gynecologic Oncology, Antalya, Turkey
  18. 18Ondokuz Mayis University, School of Medicine, Dept. Gynecologic Oncology, Samsun, Turkey
  19. 19Sitki Kocman University, School of Medicine, Dept. Gynecologic Oncology, Mugla, Turkey
  20. 20Namik Kemal University, School of Medicine, Dept. Gynecologic Oncology, Tekirdag, Turkey
  21. 21Baskent University, School of Medicine, Dept. Gynecologic Oncology, Ankara, Turkey

Abstract

Introduction/Background To investigate the clinicopathological and surgical charecteristics and to determine the factors affecting recurrence and survival rates in Turkish women with borderline ovarian tumors (BOTs).

Methodology We retrospectively investigated the data of 1090 patients with BOTs treated in 21 institutions for approximately the last 10 years. Some clinical, pathological and surgical data were evaluated. The clinicopathological, surgical data and recurrence and survival rates were evaluated using logistic regression analyses and Kaplan-Meier method.

Results The median age at diagnosis 42 years (range 13–94) and 65.1% of patients were premenopausal. Majority of cases were Stage I (77.5%) and unilateral (80.6%). The most common histologic types were serous and mucinous. Stromal microinvasion and micropapillary pattern were seen in 15,5% and 22.8%, respectively. 16.8% of patients operated via laparoscopy and 47.6% of cases were undergone conservative surgery (unilateral oopherectomy or cystectomy). Lymphadenectomy, omentectomy (or biopsy), appendectomy and peritoneal biopsies were done in 35.2%, 58.5%, 35.5% and 26.9% of cases, respectively. The median follow-up time was 66.5 months (range 6 – 238 months). Overall, 62 patients (6.1%) experienced recurrence and 14 (1.3%) died within the observation period. Five-year survival rate was 100% and median survival time was 234 months. Univariate analysis showed young age (<40 years), laparoscopic surgery and cystectomy were associated in disease free survival (DFS), lymphadenectomy, omentectomy, appendectomy, micropapillary patern and stromal microinvasion were not. None factors revealed no statistically significant association in DFS in multivariate analysis.

Abstract #845 Table 1

Clinicopathological and surgical characteristics of patients with BPTs

Conclusion Although there is no standart a surgical approach in therapy of BOTs, prognosis is perfect. Lymphadenectomy, omentectomy and appendectomy do not contribute to reccurence and survival rates.

Disclosures I have no disclosure

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.