Likelihood of incidental finding of gynecological cancer in women undergoing hysterectomy for benign indications

Objective: The aim of this study was to determine the incidence of unexpected gynecological malignancy (UGM) after hysterectomy performed for benign indications. Methods: We analysed patient sample data extracted from a medical database between 1 January 2007 and 10 August 2019 for 2740 women who underwent a hysterectomy for benign indications. The Kolmogorov-Smirnov test, Kruskal-Wallis test and Chi-square test were performed. Statistical significance was reached if p < 0.05. Results: The most common primary indications for hysterectomy were leiomyomata (1403, 51%), abnormal uterine bleeding (784, 28.61%), and pelvic organ prolapse (504, 18.39%). A laparotomic, laparoscopic or vaginal hysterectomy was performed in 1452 (53%), 836 (30.5%) and 452 (16.5%) women, respectively. unexpected gynecological malignancy after hysterectomy was diagnosed in 22 (0.80%) women. The incidence of unexpected uterine malignancies (UUM), unexpected endometrial cancer, and unexpected uterine malignancies without endometrial cancer was 0.54%, 0.40% and 0.14% respectively. Mean ages were not significantly different for abdominal, laparoscopic and vaginal hysterectomy groups (51.75 ± 9.83, 51.32 ± 9.51, 51.39 ± 10.04 years respectively, p = 0.299). No significant difference in the incidence of unexpected gynecological malignancy was noted between the groups [laparotomy 0.47%, laparoscopy 0.22%, vaginal 0.11%, p = 0.066]. The incidence of unexpected leiomyosarcoma [laparatomic 0.11%, laparascopic 0.03%, vaginal 0.0%] and unexpected endometrial carcinoma [laparatomic 0.26%, laparascopic 0.11%, vaginal 0.03%] was significantly higher in abdominal and laparascopic hysterectomy groups than the vaginal hysterectomy group and no significant difference was observed between the abdominal and laparoscopic hysterectomy groups (p = 0.037, p = 0.028, p = 0.108, respectively). Conclusion: The incidence of unexpected gynecological malignancy diagnosed after hysterectomy performed for benign conditions was very low, if the correct indications were selected.

Hysterectomy; Uterine malignancy; Unexpected malignancy; Benign indication; Unexpected gynecologic malignancy

[1] Rosero E.B., Kho K.A., Joshi G.P., Giesecke M., Schaffer J.I.: “Comparison of robotic and laparoscopic hysterectomy for benign gynecologic disease”. Obstet Gynecol., 2013, 122, 778.

[2] ACOG Committee Opinion No. 444: “choosing the route of hysterectomy for benign disease”. Obstet Gynecol., 2009, 114, 1156.

[3] Yuk J.S., Kim L.Y., Kim S.H., Lee J.H.: “The incidence of unexpected uterine malignancy in women undergoing hysterectomy for a benign condition: a national population-Based study”. Ann. Surg. Oncol., 2016, 23, 4029.

[4] Mahnert N., Morgan D., Campbell D., Johnston C., As-Sanie S.: “Unexpected gynecologic malignancy diagnosed after hysterectomy performed for benign indications”. Obstet Gynecol., 2015, 125, 397.

[5] Multinu F., Casarin J., Tortorella L., Huang Y., Weaver A., Angioni S., et al.: “Laughlin-Tommaso SK. Incidence of sarcoma in patients undergoing hysterectomy for benign indications: a population- based study”. Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol., 2019, 220, 179.

[6] Ton R., Kilic G.S., Phelps J.Y.: “A medical-legal review of power morcellation in the face of the recent FDA warning and litigation”. J. Minim. Invasive Gynecol., 2015, 22, 564.

[7] Hinchcliff E.M., Esselen K.M., Watkins J.C., Oduyebo T., Rauh-Hain J.A., Del Carmen M.G., et al.: “The role of endometrial biopsy in thepreoperativedetection of uterine leiomyosarcoma”. J. Minim. Invasive Gynecol., 2016, 23, 567.

[8] Nieboer T.E., Johnson N., Lethaby A., Tavender E., Curr E., Garry R., et al.: “Surgical approach to hysterectomy for benign gynaecological disease”. Cochrane Database Syst. Rev., 2009, 8, CD003677.

[9] Steiner R.A., Wight E., Tadir Y., Haller U.: “Electrical cutting device for laparoscopic removal of tissue from the abdominal cavity”. Obstet Gynecol., 1993, 81, 471.

[10] Kho K.A., Nezhat C.H.: “Evaluating the risks of electric uterine morcellation”. JAMA., 2014, 311, 905.

[11] Park J.Y., Park S.K., Kim D.Y., Kim J.H., Kim Y.M., Kim Y.T., et al.: “The impact of tumor morcellation during surgery on the prognosis of patients with apparently early uterine leiomyosarcoma”. Gynecol. Oncol., 2011, 122, 255.

[12] Jorgensen E.M., Modest A.M., Hur H.C., Hacker M.R., Awtrey C.S.: “Hysterectomy Practice Patterns in the Postmorcellation Era”. Obstet. Gynecol., 2019, 133, 643.

[13] Desai V.B., Guo X.M., Xu X.: “Alterations in surgical technique af- ter FDA statement on power morcellation”. Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol., 2015, 212, 685.

[14] Frick A.C., Walters M.D., Larkin K.S., Barber M.D.: “Risk of unanticipated abnormal gynecologic pathology at the time of hysterec- tomy for uterovaginal prolapse”. Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol., 2010, 202, 1.

[15] Andy U.U., Nosti P.A., Kane S., White D., Lowenstein L., Gutman R.E., et al.: “Incidence of unanticipated uterine pathology at the time of minimally invasive abdominal sacrocolpopexy”. J. Minim. Invasive Gynecol., 2014, 21, 97.

[16] Ramm O., Gleason J.L., Segal S., Antosh D.D., Kenton K.S.: “Utility of preoperative endometrial assessment in asymptomatic women undergoing hysterectomy for pelvic floor dysfunction”. Int. Urogynecol. J., 2012, 23, 913.

[17] Ackenbom M.F., Giugale L.E., Wang Y., Shepherd J.P.: “Incidence of Occult Uterine Pathology in Women Undergoing Hysterectomy With Pelvic Organ Prolapse Repair”. Female Pelvic. Med. Reconstr. Surg., 2016, 22, 332.

[18] vanHanegem N., Prins M.M.C., Bongers M.Y., Opmeer B.C, Sa- hota D.S., Mol B.M.J.: “The accuracy of endometrial sampling in women with postmenapozal bleeding: asystematic review and meta- analysis”. Eur. J. Obstet. Gynecol. Reprod Biol., 2016, 197,147.

[19] Takamizawa S., Minakami H., Usui R., Noguchi S., Ohwada M., Suzuki M.: “Risk of complications and uterine malignancies in women undergoing hysterectomy for presumed benign leiomyomas”. Gynecol. Obstet. Invest., 1999, 48, 193.

[20] Kamikabeya T.S., Etchebehere R.M., Nomelini R.S., Murta E.F.: “Gynecological malignant neoplasias diagnosed after hysterectomy performed for leiomyoma in a university hospital”. Eur. J. Gynaecol. Oncol., 2010, 31, 651.

[21] Leung F., Terzibachian J.J., Gay C., Chung Fat B., Aouar Z., Lass-abe C., et al.: “Hysterectomies performed for presumed leiomy-omas: should the fear of leiomyosarcoma make us apprehend non laparotomic surgical routes”? Gynecol. Obstet. Fertil., 2009, 37, (in French)

[22] Wan O.Y., Cheung R.Y., Chan S.S., Chung T.K.: “Risk of malig-nancyin women who underwent hysterectomy for uterine prolapse”. Aust. N. Z. J. Obstet. Gynaecol., 2013, 53, 190.

[23] Theben J.U., Schellong A.R., Altgassen C., Kelling K., Schnei-der S.,Grosse-Drieling D.: “Unexpected malignancies after laparo-scopic assisted supracervical hysterectomies (LASH): an analysis of 1,584 LASH cases”. Arch. Gynecol. Obstet., 2013, 287, 455.

[24] Ouldamer L., Rossard L., Arbion F., Marret H., Body G.: “Risk of incidental finding of endometrial cancer at the time of hysterectomy for benign condition”. J. Minim. Invasive. Gynecol., 2014, 21, 131.

[25] Rowland M., Lesnock J., Edwards R., Richard S., Zorn K., Sukum- vanich P., et al.: “Occult uterine cancer inpatients undergoing laparoscopic hysterectomy with morcellation: implications for surveillance for disease recurrence and outcomes”. Gynecol. Oncol. 2013, 130, 77.

[26] Wright J.D., Tergas A.I., Burke W.M., Cui R.R., Ananth C.V., Chen L., et al.: “Uterine Pathology in Women Undergoing Minimally In-vasive Hysterectomy Using Morcellation”. JAMA, 2014, 312, 1253.

[27] Gomez S.L., Noone A.M., Lichtensztajn D.Y., Scoppa S., Gibson J. T., Liu L., et al.: “Cancer incidence trends among Asian American populations in the United States, 1990-2008”. J. Natl. Cancer Inst., 2013, 105, 1096.

[28] Leibsohn S., d’Ablaing G., Mishell D.R., Jr., Schlaerth J.B.: “Leiomyosarcoma in a series of hysterectomies performed for pre-sumed uterine leiomyomas”. Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol., 1990, 162, 968.