Fakülteler / Faculties

Permanent URI for this communityhttps://hdl.handle.net/11727/1395

Browse

Filters

2020 - 20212

Settings

Author: search.filters.author.Celik, HusnuSubject: search.filters.subject.surgery

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • No Thumbnail Available
    Item
    The safety of major gynaecologic cancer surgery without routine preoperative COVID-19 testing in the COVID-19 era: a multicentre, retrospective, case-control study
    (2021) Akilli, Huseyin; Yetkinel, Selcuk; Celik, Husnu; Ayhan, Ali; 0000-0002-5240-8441; 34704523; AAX-3230-2020
    Our goal was to address the safety of major gynaecologic cancer surgery without routine preoperative COVID-19 testing in the COVID-19 era. The databases of seven gynaecologic cancer centres were searched in order to identify all consecutive gynaecologic cancer patients undergoing major surgery between March 11, 2020 and May 15, 2020 for this retrospective, case-control study. The case group consisted of patients with histopathologically confirmed gynaecologic cancers, and each case was matched with two counterparts who had undergone primary surgery before the COVID-19 pandemic. The case and the control groups were compared in terms of length of hospital stay, admission to the intensive care unit (ICU), intraoperative and postoperative complications. During the study period, 154 women with gynaecologic cancer undergoing major surgery were identified. Although the case group had more co-morbidities compared to the control group (103/154 vs. 178/308, respectively; p = .04), the median length of hospital stays, the rate of ICU admission, intraoperative complication rates and postoperative complication rates were similar in the two groups. Gynaecologic cancer surgery may be performed safely in the COVID-19 era with similar rates of ICU admission, intraoperative and postoperative complications compared to the patients operated before the COVID-19 pandemic.IMPACT STATEMENT What is already known on this subject? Many societies have announced their guidelines about the surgical management of gynaecologic cancer patients during the COVID-19 pandemic. However, most of them are not evidence-based and mostly on expert opinions. What do the results of this study add? The main findings of this retrospective, case-control study indicate that the short-term (30 day) outcomes of gynaecologic cancer patients undergoing major surgery in the COVID-19 era are similar to those who had been operated before the COVID-19 pandemic. The length of hospital stays, the rates of admission to the ICU, intraoperative and postoperative complications were comparable between women undergoing major gynaecologic cancer surgery in the COVID-19 era and the women who had been operated before the pandemic. What are the implications of these findings for clinical practice and/or further research? We can suggest that definitive surgery may be performed for gynaecologic cancer patients in the COVID-19 era if the resources permit and appropriate precautions such as social distancing, isolation and the use of personal protective equipment are taken.
  • No Thumbnail Available
    Item
    Multi-institutional validation of the ESMO-ESGO-ESTRO consensus conference risk grouping in Turkish endometrial cancer patients treated with comprehensive surgical staging
    (2020) Gultekin, Melis; Guler, Ozan Cem; Sari, Sezin Yuce; Yildirim, Berna Akkus; Onal, Cem; Celik, Husnu; Yuce, Kunter; Ayhan, Ali; Arik, Zafer; Kose, Fatih; Altundag, Ozden; Mustafayev, Teuta Zoto; Atalar, Banu; Bolukbasi, Yasemin; Yildiz, Ferah; 0000-0001-6908-3412; 0000-0002-2742-9021; 0000-0002-0156-5973; 0000-0003-0197-6622; 0000-0001-6661-4185; 32347768; AAC-5654-2020; D-5195-2014; G-4827-2016; W-9219-2019; AAJ-5802-2021
    In this study, 683 patients with endometrial cancer (EC) after comprehensive surgical staging were classified into four risk groups as low (LR), intermediate (IR), high-intermediate (HIR) and high-risk (HR), according to the recent consensus risk grouping. Patients with disease confined to the uterus, >= 50% myometrial invasion (MI) and/or grade 3 histology were treated with vaginal brachytherapy (VBT). Patients with stage II disease, positive/close surgical margins or extra-uterine extension were treated with external beam radiotherapy (EBRT)+/- VBT. The median follow-up was 56 months. The overall survival (OS) was significantly different between LR and HR groups, and there was a trend between LR and HIR groups. Relapse-free survival (RFS) was significantly different between LR and HIR, LR and HR and IR and HR groups. There was no significant difference in OS and RFS rates between the HIR and HR groups. In HR patients, the OS and RFS rates were significantly higher in stage IB - grade 3 and stage II compared to stage III and non-endometrioid histology without any difference between the two uterine-confined stages and between stage III and non-endometrioid histology. The current risk grouping does not clearly discriminate the HIR and IR groups. In patients with comprehensive surgical staging, a further risk grouping is needed to distinguish the real HR group.Impact statement What is already known on this subject? The standard treatment for endometrial cancer (EC) is surgery and adjuvant radiotherapy (RT) and/or chemotherapy is recommended according to risk factors. The recent European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO), European Society of Gynaecological Oncology (ESGO) and European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology (ESTRO) guideline have introduced a new risk group. However, the risk grouping is still quite heterogeneous. What do the results of this study add? This study demonstrated that the current risk grouping recommended by ESMO-ESGO-ESTRO does not clearly discriminate the intermediate risk (IR) and high-intermediate risk (HIR) groups. What are the implications of these findings for clinical practice and/or further research? Based on the results of this study, a new risk grouping can be made to discriminate HIR and IR groups clearly in patients with comprehensive surgical staging.