ObjectivesThe goal of our study was to identify preoperative factors in patients with endometrial intraepithelial neoplasia that are associated with concurrent endometrial cancer to select patients who may benefit from sentinel lymph node (SLN) assessment at the time of hysterectomy.MethodsRetrospective single institution cohort study of patients with a preoperative diagnosis of endometrial intraepithelial neoplasia who underwent hysterectomy with or without staging from January 2010 to July 2020. Modified Poisson regression was used to calculate risk ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI).ResultsOf 378 patients with a preoperative diagnosis of endometrial intraepithelial neoplasia, 275 (73%) had endometrial intraepithelial neoplasia and 103 (27%) had invasive cancer on final pathology. Age (p=0.003), race (p=0.02), and hypertension (p=0.02) were significantly associated with concurrent endometrial cancer. The median preoperative endometrial stripe was significantly greater in the endometrial cancer group (14 mm (range 10–19)) than in the endometrial intraepithelial neoplasia group (11 mm (range 8–16); p=0.002). A preoperative endometrial stripe ≥20 mm was associated with double the risk of endometrial cancer on final pathology (crude RR 2.0, 95% CI 1.3 to 2.9) and preoperative endometrial stripe ≥15 mm was 2.5 times more likely to be associated with high risk Mayo criteria on final pathology (crude RR 2.5, 95% CI 1.2 to 5.2). Of those with concurrent endometrial cancer, 5% were stage IB, 29% had tumors >2 cm, and 1% had grade 3 histology. Only 3% of all patients underwent lymph node evaluation.ConclusionsIn a large cohort of patients with a preoperative diagnosis of endometrial intraepithelial neoplasia, less than a third had invasive cancer and even fewer had pathologic features considered high risk for nodal metastasis, arguing against the use of routine SLN dissection in these patients. Endometrial stripe ≥15 mm may be a useful preoperative marker to identify patients at higher risk for concurrent endometrial cancer and may be an important criterion for use of selective SLN dissection in carefully selected patients with endometrial intraepithelial neoplasia.
Objectives
To compare subjective and objective failure after posterior colporrhaphy with and without biologic graft augmentation.
Methods
We conducted a retrospective chart review and telephone survey of patients who underwent a posterior colporrhaphy with and without biologic graft augmentation from 2005 to 2019. Patients who underwent a sacrocolpopexy, uterosacral ligament suspensions, or anterior sacrospinous ligament fixation were excluded. We determined objective, subjective, and composite failure rates.
Results
Although 137 patients met eligibility criteria, 56 did not have valid contact information and, therefore, were excluded from the study. Of the 81 with valid contact information, 67 (83%) agreed to participate. There were 24 (36%) who had a native tissue repair and 43 (64%) who had biologic graft augmentation. Median telephone follow-up was 73 months (interquartile range [IQR], 36–117). Objective failure was similar for the biologic graft (37%) and the native tissue (42%) groups (P = 0.72). Subjective failure was twice as likely among the biologic graft group (60%) compared with the native tissue group (33%, P = 0.03). Patients with a biologic graft reported a median Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory-Short Form 20 improvement of 31 (IQR, 8–33), while those with a native tissue repair reported a median improvement of 45 (IQR, 4–46). Overall, 78% were satisfied, 85% would recommend the procedure, and 84% reported symptomatic improvement. Reoperation occurred for 15% of patients.
Conclusion(s)
Although biologic graft-augmented posterior colporrhaphy may be a safe and effective treatment option, the use of biologic grafts in the posterior compartment does not appear to confer a significant long-term benefit to traditional posterior colporrhaphy.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.