Panayiotis Tanos

Biomolecular and Genetic Prognostic Factors That Can Facilitate Fertility-Sparing Treatment (FST) Decision Making in Early Stage Endometrial Cancer (ES-EC): A Systematic Review

Endometrial cancer occurs in up to 29% of women before 40 years of age. Seventy percent of these patients are nulliparous at the time. Decision making regarding fertility preservation in early stage endometrial cancer (ES-EC) is, therefore, a big challenge since the decision between the risk of cancer progression and a chance to parenthood needs to be made. Sixty-two percent of women with complete remission of ES-EC after fertility-sparing treatment (FST) report to have a pregnancy wish which, if not for FST, they would not be able to fulfil. The aim of this review was to identify and summarise the currently established biomolecular and genetic prognostic factors that can facilitate decision making for FST in ES-EC. A comprehensive search strategy was carried out across four databases; Cochrane, Embase, MEDLINE, and PubMed; they were searched between March 1946 and 22nd December 2022. Thirty-four studies were included in this study which was conducted in line with the PRISMA criteria checklist. The final 34 articles encompassed 9165 patients. The studies were assessed using the Critical Appraisal Skills Program (CASP). PTEN and POLE alterations we found to be good prognostic factors of ES-EC, favouring FST. MSI, CTNNB1, and K-RAS alterations were found to be fair prognostic factors of ES-EC, favouring FST but carrying a risk of recurrence. PIK3CA, HER2, ARID1A, P53, L1CAM, and FGFR2 were found to be poor prognostic factors of ES-EC and therefore do not favour FST. Clinical trials with bigger cohorts are needed to further validate the fair genetic prognostic factors. Using the aforementioned good and poor genetic prognostic factors, we can make more confident decisions on FST in ES-EC.

Uterine Artery Embolization Before Myomectomy: Is It Worth the Trouble?

This study compared patients who underwent myomectomy with preoperative uterine artery embolization (UAE) to those who underwent surgery without UAE. The primary objective was to analyze whether preoperative embolization reduces perioperative blood loss and other related complications. The secondary objective was to analyze the long-term outcomes of the 2 techniques in terms of fertility and obstetrical complications. Observational cohort retrospective study approved by the Brugmann University Hospital's ethics committee (CE2023/79). The department of gynecology database was used to extract all myomectomy cases between January 2011 and December 2021. Hysteroscopic myomectomies were excluded. 192 patients were included. The population was divided according to the presence or absence of preoperative UAE. The UAE and myomectomy group comprised 95 cases between 2011 and 2020, while the myomectomy-only group consisted of 97 cases between 2014 and 2021. Blood loss was significantly lower when preoperative UAE was performed (175.9 [308.5] mL versus 623.3 [697.5] mL, p-value <.0001). However, there was no significant difference in postoperative haemoglobin, blood transfusion rate or emergent hysterectomy conversions compared to myomectomy as the only treatment. UAE was associated with complications that may result in infertility, such as adhesions (15.3% UAE group vs. 2.2% non-UAE group, p-value .02) and an increased incidence of miscarriage in pregnancies (53.5% UAE group vs. 22.3% non-UAE group, p-value = .01). Furthermore, in cases where a pregnancy did progress following UAE, later obstetrical complications such as abnormal placentation or uterine rupture were common in the series (21.7% UAE group vs. 0% non-UAE group, p-value = .03). The findings of our study indicate that, other than a lower estimated blood loss (EBL), preoperative UAE does not appear to improve the outcome of myomectomies, while potentially increasing the risk of fertility and pregnancy related complications.