Objective: To compare reproductive and oncologic outcomes of patients diagnosed with early-stage epithelial ovarian carcinoma, borderline ovarian tumors, or nonepithelial ovarian carcinoma according to receipt of fertility-sparing surgery or conventional surgery.
Data sources: PubMed was searched from January 1, 1995, to May 29, 2020.
Methods of study selection: Studies were included if they (1) enrolled women of childbearing age diagnosed with ovarian cancer between the ages of 18 years and 50 years, (2) reported on oncologic and/or reproductive outcomes after fertility-sparing surgery for ovarian cancer, and (3) included at least 20 patients.
Tabulation, integration, and results: The initial search identified 995 studies. After duplicates were removed, we abstracted 980 unique citations. Of those screened, 167 publications were identified as potentially relevant, and evaluated for inclusion and exclusion criteria. The final review included 44 studies in epithelial ovarian cancer, 42 in borderline ovarian tumors, and 31 in nonepithelial ovarian carcinoma. The narrative synthesis demonstrated that overall survival does not seem to be compromised in patients undergoing fertility-sparing surgery compared with those undergoing conventional surgery, although long-term data are limited. Areas of controversy include safety of fertility-sparing surgery in the setting of high-risk factors (stage IC, grade 3, and clear cell histology), as well as type of surgery (salpingo-oophorectomy vs cystectomy). It seems that although there may be some fertility compromise after surgery, pregnancy and live-birth rates are encouraging.
Conclusion: Fertility-sparing surgery is safe and feasible in women with early-stage low-risk ovarian cancer. Pregnancy outcomes for these patients also seem to be similar to those of the general population.
Keywords: Borderline tumor; Germ cell tumor; Sex cord–stromal tumor.
Copyright © 2020. Published by Elsevier Inc.