新确诊的晚期卵巢癌患者在切除手术中目前的腹膜切除术:韩国妇科肿瘤学组研究(KGOG 4004)。

IF 3.4 2区 医学 Q1 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY Journal of Gynecologic Oncology Pub Date : 2024-10-22 DOI:10.3802/jgo.2025.36.e39
Myeong-Seon Kim, Yoo-Young Lee, Soo Jin Park, Hee Seung Kim, Heon Jong Yoo, Myong Cheol Lim, Yong Jung Song, Eun-Ju Lee
{"title":"新确诊的晚期卵巢癌患者在切除手术中目前的腹膜切除术:韩国妇科肿瘤学组研究(KGOG 4004)。","authors":"Myeong-Seon Kim, Yoo-Young Lee, Soo Jin Park, Hee Seung Kim, Heon Jong Yoo, Myong Cheol Lim, Yong Jung Song, Eun-Ju Lee","doi":"10.3802/jgo.2025.36.e39","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Because of the possible therapeutic benefit of removing occult tumor cells, a source of recurrence and chemoresistance, total parietal peritonectomy (TPP) is an alternative treatment for advanced epithelial ovarian/fallopian tube/primary peritoneal cancer. Interventional studies comparing TPP with selective parietal peritonectomy (SPP) are in progress. Since surgeons skilled in TPP are essential for such trials to be conducted, this nationwide survey aimed to examine current peritonectomy practice among gynecologic oncologists in Korea.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A 17-item questionnaire, developed by a surgery committee and reviewed by the scientific review board of the Korean Gynecology Oncology Group (KGOG), was distributed to 144 KGOG members. The questionnaire was divided into 3 categories: respondent demographics, peritonectomy practice during primary debulking surgery (PDS), and peritonectomy practice during interval debulking surgery (IDS).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We received 88 (61.1%) valid responses. Of the valid respondents, 98.9% and 93.8% performed SPP during PDS and IDS, respectively. Only 4.9% of the respondents performed TPP during IDS. Most respondents performed peritonectomy in cases where optimal postoperative outcomes were expected. Approximately 50.6% of the respondents had performed peritonectomy independently, while the others did so in cooperation with non-gynecologic surgeons. The primary reasons for not performing TPP were concerns about morbidity and uncertainty about the clinical benefits of the procedure.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>SPP is the predominant technique used in both PDS and IDS in Korea. A small percentage (4.9%) of gynecologic oncologists have performed TPP during IDS. Accordingly, a study regarding the feasibility of TPP should be conducted before proceeding with a prospective clinical trial.</p>","PeriodicalId":15868,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Gynecologic Oncology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Current peritonectomy practice during debulking surgery in patients with newly diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer: a Korean Gynecologic Oncology Group Study (KGOG 4004).\",\"authors\":\"Myeong-Seon Kim, Yoo-Young Lee, Soo Jin Park, Hee Seung Kim, Heon Jong Yoo, Myong Cheol Lim, Yong Jung Song, Eun-Ju Lee\",\"doi\":\"10.3802/jgo.2025.36.e39\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Because of the possible therapeutic benefit of removing occult tumor cells, a source of recurrence and chemoresistance, total parietal peritonectomy (TPP) is an alternative treatment for advanced epithelial ovarian/fallopian tube/primary peritoneal cancer. Interventional studies comparing TPP with selective parietal peritonectomy (SPP) are in progress. Since surgeons skilled in TPP are essential for such trials to be conducted, this nationwide survey aimed to examine current peritonectomy practice among gynecologic oncologists in Korea.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A 17-item questionnaire, developed by a surgery committee and reviewed by the scientific review board of the Korean Gynecology Oncology Group (KGOG), was distributed to 144 KGOG members. The questionnaire was divided into 3 categories: respondent demographics, peritonectomy practice during primary debulking surgery (PDS), and peritonectomy practice during interval debulking surgery (IDS).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We received 88 (61.1%) valid responses. Of the valid respondents, 98.9% and 93.8% performed SPP during PDS and IDS, respectively. Only 4.9% of the respondents performed TPP during IDS. Most respondents performed peritonectomy in cases where optimal postoperative outcomes were expected. Approximately 50.6% of the respondents had performed peritonectomy independently, while the others did so in cooperation with non-gynecologic surgeons. The primary reasons for not performing TPP were concerns about morbidity and uncertainty about the clinical benefits of the procedure.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>SPP is the predominant technique used in both PDS and IDS in Korea. A small percentage (4.9%) of gynecologic oncologists have performed TPP during IDS. Accordingly, a study regarding the feasibility of TPP should be conducted before proceeding with a prospective clinical trial.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15868,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Gynecologic Oncology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Gynecologic Oncology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3802/jgo.2025.36.e39\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Gynecologic Oncology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3802/jgo.2025.36.e39","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:全顶腹膜切除术(TPP)是治疗晚期上皮性卵巢癌/输卵管癌/原发性腹膜癌的一种替代疗法,因为切除隐匿的肿瘤细胞(复发和化疗耐药性的来源)可能会带来治疗上的益处。比较 TPP 与选择性顶叶腹膜切除术(SPP)的介入性研究正在进行中。由于熟练掌握 TPP 的外科医生对此类试验的开展至关重要,因此本次全国性调查旨在研究韩国妇科肿瘤专家目前的腹膜切除术实践:方法:向 144 名韩国妇科肿瘤学组(KGOG)成员发放了由外科委员会制定并经韩国妇科肿瘤学组(KGOG)科学审查委员会审查的 17 个项目的调查问卷。问卷分为三类:受访者的人口统计学特征、初次去势手术(PDS)中的腹膜切除术实践以及间歇性去势手术(IDS)中的腹膜切除术实践:我们收到了 88 份(61.1%)有效回复。在有效答卷中,98.9% 和 93.8% 的答卷人分别在 PDS 和 IDS 期间进行了腹膜剥离术。只有 4.9% 的受访者在 IDS 期间进行了 TPP。大多数受访者在预期术后效果最佳的情况下进行了腹膜切除术。约 50.6% 的受访者曾独立实施过腹膜切除术,其他受访者则是与非妇科外科医生合作实施的。不进行TPP的主要原因是担心发病率和不确定该手术的临床疗效:结论:在韩国,SPP是PDS和IDS的主要技术。只有一小部分(4.9%)妇科肿瘤专家在 IDS 中实施过 TPP。因此,在进行前瞻性临床试验之前,应该对 TPP 的可行性进行研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Current peritonectomy practice during debulking surgery in patients with newly diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer: a Korean Gynecologic Oncology Group Study (KGOG 4004).

Objective: Because of the possible therapeutic benefit of removing occult tumor cells, a source of recurrence and chemoresistance, total parietal peritonectomy (TPP) is an alternative treatment for advanced epithelial ovarian/fallopian tube/primary peritoneal cancer. Interventional studies comparing TPP with selective parietal peritonectomy (SPP) are in progress. Since surgeons skilled in TPP are essential for such trials to be conducted, this nationwide survey aimed to examine current peritonectomy practice among gynecologic oncologists in Korea.

Methods: A 17-item questionnaire, developed by a surgery committee and reviewed by the scientific review board of the Korean Gynecology Oncology Group (KGOG), was distributed to 144 KGOG members. The questionnaire was divided into 3 categories: respondent demographics, peritonectomy practice during primary debulking surgery (PDS), and peritonectomy practice during interval debulking surgery (IDS).

Results: We received 88 (61.1%) valid responses. Of the valid respondents, 98.9% and 93.8% performed SPP during PDS and IDS, respectively. Only 4.9% of the respondents performed TPP during IDS. Most respondents performed peritonectomy in cases where optimal postoperative outcomes were expected. Approximately 50.6% of the respondents had performed peritonectomy independently, while the others did so in cooperation with non-gynecologic surgeons. The primary reasons for not performing TPP were concerns about morbidity and uncertainty about the clinical benefits of the procedure.

Conclusion: SPP is the predominant technique used in both PDS and IDS in Korea. A small percentage (4.9%) of gynecologic oncologists have performed TPP during IDS. Accordingly, a study regarding the feasibility of TPP should be conducted before proceeding with a prospective clinical trial.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Gynecologic Oncology
Journal of Gynecologic Oncology ONCOLOGY-OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY
CiteScore
6.00
自引率
2.60%
发文量
84
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Gynecologic Oncology (JGO) is an official publication of the Asian Society of Gynecologic Oncology. Abbreviated title is ''J Gynecol Oncol''. It was launched in 1990. The JGO''s aim is to publish the highest quality manuscripts dedicated to the advancement of care of the patients with gynecologic cancer. It is an international peer-reviewed periodical journal that is published bimonthly (January, March, May, July, September, and November). Supplement numbers are at times published. The journal publishes editorials, original and review articles, correspondence, book review, etc.
期刊最新文献
Ovarian squamous cell carcinoma: clinicopathological features, prognosis and immunotherapy outcomes. Is presumed clinical stage I endometrial cancer using PET-CT and MRI accurate in predicting surgical staging? Fertility-sparing treatment outcomes using immune checkpoint inhibitors in endometrial cancer patients with Lynch syndrome. Poor accuracy of endometrial sampling in patients with uterine carcinosarcomas: a nationwide analysis. Early prediction and risk stratification of ovarian cancer based on clinical data using machine learning approaches.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1