Scholarlink

Introduction <p>The aim of this paper is to study the agreement between the findings described by the surgeon during surgery (surgical Peritoneal Cancer Index or sPCI) and those obtained after the histopathological analysis (pathological Peritoneal Cancer Index or pPCI) of the resection specimens, in addition to their prognostic implications.</p> Materials and methods <p>A consecutive series of patients diagnosed with high-grade serous ovarian cancer with peritoneal dissemination was analyzed between January 2008 and December 2022. sPCI were correlated with the pPCI results. The study considered the surgeon as a diagnostic tool and established, in ovarian cancer, the parameters of sensitivity, specificity, predictive values, and probability coefficients. Specifically, the study focused on the subgroup of patients with false-positive results from sPCI compared to pPCI and its usefulness in assessing the prognosis of the disease.</p> Results <p>A total of 231 patients were included, evaluating a total of 3003 peritoneal areas. The median sPCI was 9 (range: 0–35) and 7 for pPCI. Of the 3,003 peritoneal areas evaluated, 132 areas were considered false positives for sPCI. After multivariate analysis, the location of the lesions in the supramesocolic compartment (OR 2.37, 95% CI 1.19–4.53, <i>p</i> = 0.014) was the only independent factor related to a false-positive sPCI result. Patients with false-positive sPCI had a better disease-free survival estimate.</p> Conclusions <p>The main usefulness of pPCI would be determined by its ability to correct prognostic estimates of the disease, especially in the case of false positives.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Peritoneal cancer index in ovarian cancer: what does the surgeon really see?

  • 期刊论文

  • 发表日期：

    2025年5月17日

查看全文
  • Francisco Javier López-Hernández,
  • Alida González-Gil,
  • Amparo Torroba,
  • Elena Gil-Gómez,
  • Vicente Olivares-Ripoll,
  • Alvaro Cerezuela-Fernández Palencia,
  • Alvaro Martínez-Espí,
  • Laura García-Caballero,
  • Jeronimo Martínez,
  • Rafael Guijarro-Campillo,
  • Pedro Antonio Cascales-Campos

摘要

Introduction

The aim of this paper is to study the agreement between the findings described by the surgeon during surgery (surgical Peritoneal Cancer Index or sPCI) and those obtained after the histopathological analysis (pathological Peritoneal Cancer Index or pPCI) of the resection specimens, in addition to their prognostic implications.

Materials and methods

A consecutive series of patients diagnosed with high-grade serous ovarian cancer with peritoneal dissemination was analyzed between January 2008 and December 2022. sPCI were correlated with the pPCI results. The study considered the surgeon as a diagnostic tool and established, in ovarian cancer, the parameters of sensitivity, specificity, predictive values, and probability coefficients. Specifically, the study focused on the subgroup of patients with false-positive results from sPCI compared to pPCI and its usefulness in assessing the prognosis of the disease.

Results

A total of 231 patients were included, evaluating a total of 3003 peritoneal areas. The median sPCI was 9 (range: 0–35) and 7 for pPCI. Of the 3,003 peritoneal areas evaluated, 132 areas were considered false positives for sPCI. After multivariate analysis, the location of the lesions in the supramesocolic compartment (OR 2.37, 95% CI 1.19–4.53, p = 0.014) was the only independent factor related to a false-positive sPCI result. Patients with false-positive sPCI had a better disease-free survival estimate.

Conclusions

The main usefulness of pPCI would be determined by its ability to correct prognostic estimates of the disease, especially in the case of false positives.