An overview of the current debate between using minimally invasive surgery versus laparotomy for interval cytoreductive surgery in epithelial ovarian cancer.

Abstract

The standard of care for treatment of advanced-stage epithelial ovarian cancer is primarily surgery followed by platinum-based chemotherapy, with the operative goal to achieve complete gross resection. Cytoreductive surgeries for epithelial ovarian cancer historically were performed via open laparotomy; however, as minimally invasive techniques became more widely accepted within gynecologic oncology, interest in employing this approach in the setting of cytoreductive surgery for epithelial ovarian cancer has grown. The purpose of this review was to examine the current debate between the use of minimally invasive surgery versus laparotomy as an approach to interval cytoreductive surgery in advanced epithelial ovarian cancer. While numerous retrospective and feasibility studies have found comparable outcomes with respect to complete gross residual disease, progression-free survival, and overall survival between minimally invasive and laparotomy approaches to interval cytoreductive surgery for epithelial ovarian cancer, methodological challenges limit the utility of these data. Given potential risks of underestimating disease burden and failing to achieve complete resection using a minimally invasive approach, further rigorous studies are needed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of minimally invasive surgery in this setting and to better define the subset of patients who would receive the greatest benefit from a minimally invasive approach.