Article Data

  • Views 905
  • Dowloads 155

Original Research

Open Access

Comparison of intraoperative and early postoperative results of patients undergoing laparoscopic versus laparotomic staging surgery for ovarian cancer

  • Fatma Basak Tanoglu1,*,
  • Gurkan Kiran1
  • Shamsi Mehdiyev1
  • Caglar Cetin1
  • Ozge Pasin2

1Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Bezmialem University Faculty of Medicine, 34093 Istanbul, Turkey

2Department of Biostatistics, Bezmialem University Faculty of Medicine, 34093 Istanbul, Turkey

DOI: 10.22514/ejgo.2023.087 Vol.44,Issue 5,October 2023 pp.125-131

Submitted: 26 August 2023 Accepted: 26 September 2023

Published: 15 October 2023

*Corresponding Author(s): Fatma Basak Tanoglu E-mail:


Thus far, the traditional method of performing staging surgery in ovarian cancer has been laparotomy. Although randomized controlled trials are lacking, minimally invasive options are deemed safe and sufficient for staging and treatment of early-stage ovarian cancer. This study aims to compare the intraoperative and early postoperative outcomes of patients who underwent staging surgery via laparoscopy or laparotomy because of ovarian cancer. This retrospective study was conducted among 37 patients undergoing staging surgery done via laparoscopy (Group 1) or laparotomy (Group 2) between February 2018 and May 2022 at a single center. Intraoperative and early postoperative results were collected. Regarding postoperative complications between the two groups, the formation of lymphoceles and hernias in Group 2 was significantly higher compared to Group 1 (p = 0.019 and p = 0.050, respectively). When these groups were compared regarding Clavien-Dindo classification, Grade 1 complications were high among the laparoscopy group. In contrast, Grade 2, 3A and 3B complications were significantly higher in the laparotomy group (p = 0.002). Regarding hospital stay during the postoperative period, the patients in Group 2 stayed significantly longer compared to Group 1 (p = 0.001). As an alternative to open surgery for diagnosing and staging ovarian cancer, the laparoscopic approach is reliable and can be applied safely to patients. However, more prospective randomized studies are needed to support the obtained data.


Ovarian cancer; Staging surgery; Laparoscopy; Laparotomy; Complications

Cite and Share

Fatma Basak Tanoglu,Gurkan Kiran,Shamsi Mehdiyev,Caglar Cetin,Ozge Pasin. Comparison of intraoperative and early postoperative results of patients undergoing laparoscopic versus laparotomic staging surgery for ovarian cancer. European Journal of Gynaecological Oncology. 2023. 44(5);125-131.


[1] National Cancer Institute. Surveillance, epidemiology, and end results program. Cancer stat facts: ovarian cancer. Available at: (Accessed: 30 December 2018).

[2] Torre LA, Trabert B, DeSantis CE, Miller KD, Samimi G, Runowicz CD, et al. Ovarian cancer statistics, 2018. CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians. 2018; 68: 284–296.

[3] Stewart C, Ralyea C, Lockwood S. Ovarian cancer: an integrated review. Seminars in Oncology Nursing. 2019; 35: 151–156.

[4] Liu B, Liao J, Gu W, Wang J, Li G, Wang L. ADNEX model-based diagnosis of ovarian cancer using MRI images. Contrast Media & Molecular Imaging. 2021; 2021: 2146578.

[5] Reis-de-Carvalho C, Castro C, Osório F. Unusual endometriosis mimicking disseminated cancer after hysterectomy in a young woman. BMJ Case Reports. 2021; 14: e241002.

[6] Morales-Castelán JE, Lara-Hernández ME, Hernández-Nava JM, Lino-Silva LS, Salcedo-Hernández RA. Abdominal tuberculosis mimicking ovarian cancer. A case series report. Gac Med Mex. 2022; 158: 124–127.

[7] Nikolaidi A, Fountzilas E, Fostira F, Psyrri A, Gogas H, Papadimitriou C. Neoadjuvant treatment in ovarian cancer: new perspectives, new challenges. Frontiers in Oncology. 2022; 12: 820128.

[8] Kamei Y, Kobayashi E, Nakatani E, Shiomi M, Sawada M, Kakuda M, et al. A single institution’s experience with minimally invasive surgery for ovarian cancer, and a systematic meta-analysis of the literature. International Journal of Clinical Oncology. 2023; 28: 794–803.

[9] Park JY, Bae J, Lim MC, Lim SY, Seo SS, Kang S, et al. Laparoscopic and laparotomic staging in stage I epithelial ovarian cancer: a comparison of feasibility and safety. International Journal of Gynecologic Cancer. 2008; 18: 1202–1209.

[10] Pinto P, Burgetova A, Cibula D, Haldorsen IS, Indrielle-Kelly T, Fischerova D. Prediction of surgical outcome in advanced ovarian cancer by imaging and laparoscopy: a narrative review. Cancers. 2023; 15: 1904.

[11] Pinto P, Chiappa V, Alcazar J, Franchi D, Testa AC, Cibula D, et al. OC11.01: preoperative assessment of non-resectability in patients with ovarian cancer using imaging (ISAAC study): an interim analysis. Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology. 2022; 60: 31.

[12] Vergote I, Magrina JF, Zanagnolo V, Magtibay PM, Butler K, Gil-Moreno A, et al. The LACC trial and minimally invasive surgery in cervical cancer. Journal of Minimally Invasive Gynecology. 2020; 27: 462–463.

[13] Kooby DA. Laparoscopic surgery for cancer: historical, theoretical, and technical considerations. Oncology. 2006; 20: 917–927.

[14] Bagley CM Jr, Young RC, Schein PS, Chabner BA, Devita VT. Ovarian carcinoma metastatic to the diaphragm—frequently undiagnosed at laparotomy. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology. 1973; 116: 397–400.

[15] Querleu D, Leblanc E. Laparoscopic infrarenal paraaortic lymph node dissection for restaging of carcinoma of the ovary or fallopian tube. Cancer. 1994; 73: 1467–1471.

[16] Ghezzi F, Cromi A, Uccella S, Bergamini V, Tomera S, Franchi M, et al. Laparoscopy versus laparotomy for the surgical management of apparent early stage ovarian cancer. Gynecologic Oncology. 2007; 105: 409–413.

[17] Gallotta V, Petrillo M, Conte C, Vizzielli G, Fagotti A, Ferrandina G, et al. Laparoscopic versus laparotomic surgical staging for early-stage ovarian cancer: a case-control study. Journal of Minimally Invasive Gynecology. 2016; 23: 769–774.

[18] Ran X, He X, Li Z. Comparison of laparoscopic and open surgery for women with early-stage epithelial ovarian cancer. Frontiers in Oncology. 2022; 12: 879889.

[19] Gauthier T, Uzan C, Lefeuvre D, Kane A, Canlorbe G, Deschamps F, et al. Lymphocele and ovarian cancer: risk factors and impact on survival. The Oncologist. 2012; 17: 1198–1203.

[20] Vetere PF, Lazarou G, Mondesir C, Wei K, Khullar P, Ogden L. Strategies to minimize adhesion formation after surgery. JSLS: Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons. 2011; 15: 350–354.

[21] Trocchi P, Mach P, Kimmig KR, Stang A. Ovarian cancer surgery in Germany: an analysis of the nationwide hospital file 2005–2015. Women’s Health. 2022; 18: 17455065221075903.

[22] Matsuo K, Huang Y, Matsuzaki S, Klar M, Roman LD, Sood AK, et al. Minimally invasive surgery and risk of capsule rupture for women with early-stage ovarian cancer. JAMA Oncology. 2020; 6: 1110–1113.

Abstracted / indexed in

Science Citation Index Expanded (SciSearch) Created as SCI in 1964, Science Citation Index Expanded now indexes over 9,500 of the world’s most impactful journals across 178 scientific disciplines. More than 53 million records and 1.18 billion cited references date back from 1900 to present.

Biological Abstracts Easily discover critical journal coverage of the life sciences with Biological Abstracts, produced by the Web of Science Group, with topics ranging from botany to microbiology to pharmacology. Including BIOSIS indexing and MeSH terms, specialized indexing in Biological Abstracts helps you to discover more accurate, context-sensitive results.

Google Scholar Google Scholar is a freely accessible web search engine that indexes the full text or metadata of scholarly literature across an array of publishing formats and disciplines.

JournalSeek Genamics JournalSeek is the largest completely categorized database of freely available journal information available on the internet. The database presently contains 39226 titles. Journal information includes the description (aims and scope), journal abbreviation, journal homepage link, subject category and ISSN.

Current Contents - Clinical Medicine Current Contents - Clinical Medicine provides easy access to complete tables of contents, abstracts, bibliographic information and all other significant items in recently published issues from over 1,000 leading journals in clinical medicine.

BIOSIS Previews BIOSIS Previews is an English-language, bibliographic database service, with abstracts and citation indexing. It is part of Clarivate Analytics Web of Science suite. BIOSIS Previews indexes data from 1926 to the present.

Journal Citation Reports/Science Edition Journal Citation Reports/Science Edition aims to evaluate a journal’s value from multiple perspectives including the journal impact factor, descriptive data about a journal’s open access content as well as contributing authors, and provide readers a transparent and publisher-neutral data & statistics information about the journal.

Submission Turnaround Time