Endometriosis, defined by the presence of viable extrauterine endometrial glands and stroma, can grow or bleed cyclically, and possesses characteristics including a destructive, invasive, and metastatic nature. Since endometriosis may result in pelvic inflammation, adhesion, chronic pain, and infertility, and can progress to biologically malignant tumors, it is a long-term major health issue in women of reproductive age. In this review, we analyze the Taiwan domestic research addressing associations between endometriosis and other diseases. Concerning malignant tumors, we identified four studies on the links between endometriosis and ovarian cancer, one on breast cancer, two on endometrial cancer, one on colorectal cancer, and one on other malignancies, as well as one on associations between endometriosis and irritable bowel syndrome, one on links with migraine headache, three on links with pelvic inflammatory diseases, four on links with infertility, four on links with obesity, four on links with chronic liver disease, four on links with rheumatoid arthritis, four on links with chronic renal disease, five on links with diabetes mellitus, and five on links with cardiovascular diseases (hypertension, hyperlipidemia, etc.). The data available to date support that women with endometriosis might be at risk of some chronic illnesses and certain malignancies, although we consider the evidence for some comorbidities to be of low quality, for example, the association between colon cancer and adenomyosis/endometriosis. We still believe that the risk of comorbidity might be higher in women with endometriosis than that we supposed before. More research is needed to determine whether women with endometriosis are really at risk of these comorbidities.

Malignant mixed Müllerian tumors (MMMT, carcinosarcomas [CS]) of female genital tract are defined histologically as a biphasic tumor consisting of both carcinoma (malignant epithelial elements) and sarcoma (malignant mesenchymal or stromal elements) components. 1-3 CS usually arises from the uterus but may also rarely appear in the ovary, Fallopian tube, cervix, or peritoneum. [4][5][6] In the past and traditionally, uterine CS (UCS) has been regarded as a subtype of uterine sarcomas and is often analyzed after grouping other uterine sarcomas, such as undifferentiated uterine sarcoma, endometrial stromal sarcoma, and leiomyosarcoma. [7][8][9][10] Recently, clinical, pathologic, and biological evidence has indicated that UCS is a monoclonal origin, which is derived from the Müllerian duct and closely related to high-grade endometrial carcinoma with the driving force to result in sarcomatous transformation (metaplastic carcinoma), and subsequently form the homologous or heterologous groups, depending on the characteristics of the stroma or mesenchymal components of endometrial tissues. [11][12][13] Primary complete surgical staging or primary cytoreductive surgery (PCS) is a key factor in the management of women with UCS, based on the studies obtained from the experience for high-grade or advanced endometrial cancer and uterine sarcomas as well as epithelial ovarian cancer, primary peritoneal serous carcinoma, and primary fallopian tube cancers. 10,14-21 PCS includes a total hysterectomy, bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy,

The use of weekly chemotherapy for the treatment of patients with advanced-stage serous-type epithelial Tubo-ovarian cancer (ETOC), and primary peritoneal serous carcinoma (PPSC) is acceptable as the front-line postoperative chemotherapy after primary cytoreductive surgery (PCS). The main component of dose-dense chemotherapy is weekly paclitaxel (80 mg/m2), but it would be interesting to know what is the difference between combination of triweekly cisplatin (20 mg/m2) or triweekly carboplatin (carboplatin area under the curve 5-7 mg/mL per min [AUC 5-7]) in the dose-dense paclitaxel regimen. Therefore, we compared the outcomes of women with Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) stage IIIC ETOC and PPSC treated with PCS and a subsequent combination of dose-dense weekly paclitaxel and triweekly cisplatin (paclitaxel–cisplatin) or triweekly carboplatin using AUC 5 (paclitaxel–carboplatin). Between January 2010 and December 2016, 40 women with International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) stage IIIC EOC, FTC, or PPSC were enrolled, including 18 treated with paclitaxel–cisplatin and the remaining 22 treated with paclitaxel–carboplatin. There were no statistically significant differences in disease characteristics of patients between two groups. Outcomes in paclitaxel–cisplatin group seemed to be little better than those in paclitaxel–carboplatin (median progression-free survival [PFS] 30 versus 25 months as well as median overall survival [OS] 58.5 versus 55.0 months); however, neither reached a statistically significant difference. In terms of adverse events (AEs), patients in paclitaxel–carboplatin group had more AEs, with a higher risk of neutropenia and grade 3/4 neutropenia, and the need for a longer period to complete the front-line chemotherapy, and the latter was associated with worse outcome for patients. We found that a period between the first-time chemotherapy to the last dose (6 cycles) of chemotherapy >21 weeks was associated with a worse prognosis in patients compared to that ≤21 weeks, with hazard ratio (HR) of 81.24 for PFS and 9.57 for OS. As predicted, suboptimal debulking surgery (>1 cm) also contributed to a worse outcome than optimal debulking surgery (≤1 cm) with HR of 14.38 for PFS and 11.83 for OS. Based on the aforementioned findings, both regimens were feasible and effective, but maximal efforts should be made to achieve optimal debulking surgery and following the on-schedule administration of dose-dense weekly paclitaxel plus triweekly platinum compounds. Randomized trials validating the findings are warranted.

This article aims to evaluate the safety and outcome of women with pelvic organ prolapse (POP) treated by a minimally invasive bilateral sacrospinous hysteropexy (UPHOLD LITE Vaginal Support System, Boston Scientific) without concomittent anti-incontinence surgery. This retrospective study was conducted between 2014 and 2016. Evaluated items included surgical parameter and postoperative outcome. Three hundred thirteen women with POP were eligible and 22 were excluded because of history of either or more following situations, such as hysterectomy, mesh augmentation, previous anti-incontinence procedures, and radical pelvic surgery before. With a median follow-up of 26 months, surgery-related morbidity rate was 23.7% (69/291), including 1 with bladder injury (0.3%), 2 with hematoma (0.7%), 8 with urinary tract infection (2.8%), 48 with voiding dysfunction (16.5%) and 10 with mesh problems (3.4%). Among these morbidities, 12 patients (4.1%) needed surgical intervention, including 6 for mesh problems, 1 for bladder injury, 2 for hematoma, and 3 for anti-incontinence surgery. The difference of pelvic organ prolapse quantification (POP-Q) stage before and after surgery showed a statistical significance (anterior portion from 1.36 ± 2.60 to −2.69 ± 0.26, posterior portion from −1.29 ± 2.08 to −2.46 ± 0.62, and cervix portion from 2.03 ± 4.80 to −6.98 ± 2.26, all P < .001). At the end of August 2018, re-intervention rate for POP recurrence was 2.1% (n = 6), including abdominal sacrocolpopexy (n = 1), anterior repair (n = 1), vaginal total hysterectomy and uterine-sacral ligament suspension (n = 1), vaginal total hysterectomy and LeFort (n = 1), LeFort (n = 1), and pessary support (n = 1). Because some women developed postoperative lower urinary tract symptom, preoperative evaluation, including careful and detailed history taking, and urodynamic evaluation is suggested. After adequate counseling, uterine-preserving sacrospinal ligament suspension by UPHOLD LITE Vaginal Support System surgery could be considered in the management of women with POP, because of its high successful rate (97.9%) and low morbidity rate.

Radical hysterectomy (RH) is the standard treatment for early stage cervical cancer, but the surgical approach for locally bulky-size cervical cancer (LBS-CC) is still unclear. We retrospectively compared the outcomes of women with LBS-CC treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) and subsequent RH between the robotic (R-RH) and abdominal approaches (A-RH). Between 2012 and 2014, 39 women with LBS-CC FIGO (International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics) stage IB2–IIB were treated with NACT-R-RH (n = 18) or NACT-A-RH (n = 21). Surgical parameters and prognosis were compared. Patient characteristics were not significantly different between the groups, but the NACT-R-RH group had significantly more patients with FIGO stage IIB disease, received multi-agent-based NACT, and had a lower percentage of deep stromal invasion than the NACT-A-RH group. After NACT-R-RH, surgical parameters were better, but survival outcomes, such as disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS), were significantly worse. On multivariate analysis, FIGO stage IIB contributed to worse DFS (p = 0.003) and worse OS (p = 0.012) in the NACT-A-RH group. Women with LBS-CC treated with NACT-R-RH have better perioperative outcomes but poorer survival outcomes compared with those treated with NACT-A-RH. Thus, patients with FIGO stage IIB LBS-CC disease might not be suitable for surgery after multi-agent-based NACT.