open access
Prognostic significance of omental disease and the role of omentectomy in non-endometrioid endometrial cancer
, 2, 2, 2, 3, 2
Affiliations- Department of Gynecology, Gynecologic Oncology, Adana City Training and Research Hospital, Türkiye, Türkiye
- Department of Gynecologic Oncology, Cukurova University, Adana, Türkiye, Türkiye
- Faculty of Medicine, Department of Pathology, Cukurova University, Adana, Türkiye
open access
Abstract
Objectives: Non-endometrioid endometrial cancers (non-EEC) have different management from endometrioid endometrial cancers. The purpose of this study was to investigate the prognostic significance of omental disease and the role of omentectomy in non-endometrioid endometrial cancer and discuss the current literature with the findings.
Material and methods: The study included two hundred-three patients with non-EEC who underwent surgical treatment and follow-up between January 1996 and December 2018 in a University Hospital Gynecologic Oncology Center. The patients were divided into three groups according to whether omentectomy was performed and the presence of omental metastasis. The patient’s demographics, clinical characteristics such as stage, grade, histopathologic type, lymphovascular space invasion (LVSI), myometrial invasion, lymph node involvement, and survival outcomes were compared between the groups.
Results: The study included 203 patients. Twenty-five patients (12%) had omental metastases. LVSI was reported in 57.3%, 88.0%, and 43.2% of the non-omentectomy, no-omental metastasis, and omental metastatic groups, respectively (p = 0.001). The 5-year disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) rates according to the tumor grade, peritoneal cytology, and lymphadenectomy were also compared and were found to be statistically similar. The five-year OS rates were 70.6% for the group without omental metastases and 16.2% for the group with omental metastases, respectively (p = 0.001). In the group of omentectomy, the five-year DFS rates were 62.2% in cases without omental metastasis and 13.0% in cases with omental metastasis (p = 0.001). The five-year OS rates of 86.3% and DFS rates of 80.0% in the group without omentectomy.
Conclusions: In non-endometrioid tumors, the survival rate was better in the group that did not undergo omentectomy. Based on these results, we can say that omentectomy may not be necessary for non-endometrioid tumors whose omentum is found to be normal in intraoperative visual examination.
Abstract
Objectives: Non-endometrioid endometrial cancers (non-EEC) have different management from endometrioid endometrial cancers. The purpose of this study was to investigate the prognostic significance of omental disease and the role of omentectomy in non-endometrioid endometrial cancer and discuss the current literature with the findings.
Material and methods: The study included two hundred-three patients with non-EEC who underwent surgical treatment and follow-up between January 1996 and December 2018 in a University Hospital Gynecologic Oncology Center. The patients were divided into three groups according to whether omentectomy was performed and the presence of omental metastasis. The patient’s demographics, clinical characteristics such as stage, grade, histopathologic type, lymphovascular space invasion (LVSI), myometrial invasion, lymph node involvement, and survival outcomes were compared between the groups.
Results: The study included 203 patients. Twenty-five patients (12%) had omental metastases. LVSI was reported in 57.3%, 88.0%, and 43.2% of the non-omentectomy, no-omental metastasis, and omental metastatic groups, respectively (p = 0.001). The 5-year disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) rates according to the tumor grade, peritoneal cytology, and lymphadenectomy were also compared and were found to be statistically similar. The five-year OS rates were 70.6% for the group without omental metastases and 16.2% for the group with omental metastases, respectively (p = 0.001). In the group of omentectomy, the five-year DFS rates were 62.2% in cases without omental metastasis and 13.0% in cases with omental metastasis (p = 0.001). The five-year OS rates of 86.3% and DFS rates of 80.0% in the group without omentectomy.
Conclusions: In non-endometrioid tumors, the survival rate was better in the group that did not undergo omentectomy. Based on these results, we can say that omentectomy may not be necessary for non-endometrioid tumors whose omentum is found to be normal in intraoperative visual examination.
Keywords
endometrial cancer; non-endometrioid endometrial cancer; omentectomy; prognosis
About this articleTitle
Prognostic significance of omental disease and the role of omentectomy in non-endometrioid endometrial cancer
Journal
Issue
Article type
Research paper
Pages
823-830
Published online
2023-08-14
Page views
335
Article views/downloads
355
DOI
Pubmed
Bibliographic record
Ginekol Pol 2023;94(10):823-830.
Keywords
endometrial cancer
non-endometrioid endometrial cancer
omentectomy
prognosis
Authors
Sevtap Seyfettinoglu
Ghanim Khatib
Ümran Küçükgöz Güleç
Ahmet Barış Güzel
Derya Gümürdülü
Mehmet Ali Vardar
References (25)- Beddy P, O'Neill AC, Yamamoto AK, et al. FIGO staging system for endometrial cancer: added benefits of MR imaging. Radiographics. 2012; 32(1): 241–254.
- Brincat MR, Muscat BY, Borg E. Omentectomy in endometrial cancer: An evidence-based insight. European Journal of Gynaecological Oncology. 2017; 38.
- Concin N, Matias-Guiu X, Vergote I, et al. ESGO/ESTRO/ESP guidelines for the management of patients with endometrial carcinoma. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2021; 31(1): 12–39.
- Reynaers EA, Ezendam NPM, Pijnenborg JMA. Comparable outcome between endometrioid and non-endometrioid tumors in patients with early-stage high-grade endometrial cancer. J Surg Oncol. 2015; 111(6): 790–794.
- Amant F, Cadron I, Fuso L, et al. Endometrial carcinosarcomas have a different prognosis and pattern of spread compared to high-risk epithelial endometrial cancer. Gynecol Oncol. 2005; 98(2): 274–280.
- Turan T, Ureyen I, Karalök A, et al. What is the importance of omental metastasis in patients with endometrial cancer? J Turk Ger Gynecol Assoc. 2014; 15(3): 164–172.
- Vorgias G, Fotiou S. The role of lymphadenectomy in uterine carcinosarcomas (malignant mixed mullerian tumours): a critical literature review. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2010; 282(6): 659–664.
- Usubütün A, Ozseker HS, Himmetoglu C, et al. Omentectomy for gynecologic cancer: how much sampling is adequate for microscopic examination? Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2007; 131(10): 1578–1581.
- Thomas M, Mariani A, Wright JD, et al. Surgical management and adjuvant therapy for patients with uterine clear cell carcinoma: a multi-institutional review. Gynecol Oncol. 2008; 108(2): 293–297.
- Goto T, Takano M, Aoyama T, et al. Prognosis of high-grade endometrial cancer: a comparison of serous-type and clear cell type to grade 3 endometrioid-type. Eur J Gynaecol Oncol. 2012; 33(6): 579–583.
- Concin N, Planchamp F, Abu-Rustum NR, et al. European Society of Gynaecological Oncology quality indicators for the surgical treatment of endometrial carcinoma. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2021; 31(12): 1508–1529.
- Fujiwara H, Saga Y, Takahashi K, et al. Omental metastases in clinical stage I endometrioid adenocarcinoma. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2008; 18(1): 165–167.
- Koskas M, Rouzier R, Amant F. Staging for endometrial cancer: The controversy around lymphadenectomy - Can this be resolved? Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 2015; 29(6): 845–857.
- Owens GL, Kitchener HC. Premalignant disease in the genital tract in pregnancy. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 2016; 33: 33–43.
- Kaban A, Topuz S, Erdem B, et al. Is Omentectomy Necessary for Non-Endometrioid Endometrial Cancer. Gynecol Obstet Invest. 2018; 83(5): 482–486.
- Saygili U, Kavaz S, Altunyurt S, et al. Omentectomy, peritoneal biopsy and appendectomy in patients with clinical stage I endometrial carcinoma. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2001; 11(6): 471–474.
- Chen M, Guo P, Tan J, et al. The role of omentectomy in the surgical treatment of uterine serous carcinoma. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol X. 2019; 4: 100084.
- Metindir J, Dilek GB. The role of omentectomy during the surgical staging in patients with clinical stage I endometrioid adenocarcinoma. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol. 2008; 134(10): 1067–1070.
- Düzgüner S, Ilgın H, Taşçı T, et al. Analysis of mixed type endometrial carcinoma. Journal of Turkish Society of Obstetric and Gynecology. 2014; 11(2): 119–125.
- Chen SS, Spiegel G. Stage I endometrial carcinoma: Role of omental biopsy and omentectomy. J Reprod Med Obstet Gynecol. 1991; 36(9).
- Touhami O, Trinh XB, Gregoire J, et al. Is a More Comprehensive Surgery Necessary in Patients With Uterine Serous Carcinoma? Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2015; 25(7): 1266–1270.
- Joo WD, Schwartz PE, Rutherford TJ, et al. Microscopic Omental Metastasis in Clinical Stage I Endometrial Cancer: A Meta-analysis. Ann Surg Oncol. 2015; 22(11): 3695–3700.
- Bayrak M, Yılmaz A, Yılmaz F, et al. Omental Micrometastasis in Endometrial Cancer. Oncol Res Treat. 2019; 42(9): 466–469.
- Freij M, Burbos N, Mukhopadhyay D, et al. The role of omental biopsy in endometrial cancer staging. Gynecological Surgery. 2009; 6(3): 251–253.
- Nasioudis D, Heyward Q, Gysler S, et al. Is there a benefit of performing an omentectomy for clinical stage I high-grade endometrial carcinoma? Surgical Oncology. 2021; 37: 101534.
