Persistent tubal epithelium in ovaries after salpingectomy

The aim of this study is to evaluate the presence of residual tubal tissue and endosalpingiosis on the ovarian surface after salpingectomy. A total of 105 ovarian tissues of 54 patients who underwent abdominal total hysterectomy with bilateral or unilateral salpingo-oophorectomy for benign indications between January 2019 and December 2019 were included in the study. Salpingectomy was performed prior to oophorectomy in all patients. The adhesion grade score was calculated for each case. Persistent tubal epithelium was found in 16 (29.6%) of the patients. There was a significant difference in adhesion scores between the persistent tubal epithelium negative and persistent tubal epithelium positive patients (p = 0.041). In conclusion, permanent tubal epithelium may remain in the ovaries after salpingectomy. Persistent tubal epithelium is more common in cases with intra-abdominal adhesions. Opportunistic and risk-reducing salpingectomy is effective to prevent ovarian cancer, although it is not a definitive solution.

Endosalpingiosis; Epithelial ovarian cancer; Persistent tubal epithelium; Salpingectomy.

[1] Tone A.A., Salvador S., Finlayson S.J., Tinker A.V., Kwon J.S., Lee C., et al.: “The role of the fallopian tube in ovarian cancer”. Clin. Adv. Hematol. Oncol., 2015, 10, 296-306.

[2] Esselen K.M., Ng S., Hua Y., White M., Jimenez C.A., Welch W.R., et al.: “Endosalpingiosis as it relates to tubal, ovarian and serous neoplastic tissues: an immunohistochemical study of tubal and Mül-lerian antigens”. Gynecol. Oncol., 2014, 132, 316-321.

[3] Piek J.M.J., van Diest P.J., Zweemer R.P., Jansen J.W., Poort-Keesom R.J.J., Menko F.H., et al.: “Dysplastic changes in prophylactically removed Fallopian tubes of women predisposed to developing ovarian cancer”. J. Pathol., 2001, 195, 451-456.

[4] Esselen K.M., Terry K.L., Samuel A., Elias K.M., Davis M., Welch W. R., et al.: “Endosalpingiosis: More than just an incidental finding at the time of gynecologic surgery?” Gynecol. Oncol., 2016, 142, 255-260.

[5] Gan C., Chenoy R., Chandrasekaran D., Brockbank E., Holling-worth A., Vimplis S., et al.: “Persistence of fimbrial tissue on the ovarian surface after salpingectomy”. Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol., 2017, 217, 425.

[6] Kurman R.J., Vang R., Junge J., Hannibal C.G., Kjaer S.K., Shih I.: “Papillary tubal hyperplasia”. Am. J. Surg. Pathol., 2011, 35, 1605-1614.

[7] Soong T.R., Howitt B.E., Horowitz N., Nucci M.R., Crum C.P.: “The fallopian tube, “precursor escape” and narrowing the knowledge gap to the origins of high-grade serous carcinoma”. Gynecol. Oncol., 2019, 152, 426-433.

[8] Jacobs I.J., Menon U., Ryan A., Gentry-Maharaj A., Burnell M., Kalsi J.K., et al.: “Ovarian cancer screening and mortality in the UK Collaborative Trial of Ovarian Cancer Screening (UKCTOCS): a randomised controlled trial”. Lancet (London, England), 2016, 387, 945- 956.

[9] Vang R., Shih I., Kurman R. J.: “Fallopian tube precursors of ovar-ian low- and high-grade serous neoplasms”. Histopathology, 2013, 62, 44-58.

[10] Nezhat F.R., Apostol R., Nezhat C., Pejovic T.: “New insights in the pathophysiology of ovarian cancer and implications for screening and prevention”. Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol., 2015, 213, 262-267.

[11] McAlpine J.N., Hanley G.E., Woo M.M.M., Tone A.A., Rozenberg N., Swenerton K.D., et al.: “Opportunistic salpingectomy: uptake, risks, and complications of a regional initiative for ovarian cancer prevention”. Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol., 2014, 210, 471.

[12] Committee on Gynecologic Practice: “Committee opinion no. 620: Salpingectomy for ovarian cancer prevention”. Obstet. Gynecol., 2015, 125, 279-281.

[13] Cass I., Walts A.E., Barbuto D., Lester J., Karlan B.: “A cautious view of putative precursors of serous carcinomas in the fallopian tubes of BRCA mutation carriers”. Gynecol. Oncol., 2014, 134, 492-497.

[14] Wong J.W.H., Killeen J.L., Carney M.E.: “Completeness of salp-ingectomy intended for ovarian cancer risk reduction”. Gynecol. Oncol., 2019, 155, 280-282.

[15] Ayres C., Ratnayake G., McNally O., Quinn M.: “Challenging salpingectomy as a risk-reducing measure for ovarian cancer: histopathological analysis of the tubo-ovarian interface in women undergoing risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy”. Int. J. Gynecol. Cancer, 2017, 27, 703-707.

[16] Chen F., Gaitskell K., Garcia M., Albukhari A., Tsaltas J., Ahmed A. A.: “Serous tubal intraepithelial carcinomas associated with high-grade serous ovarian carcinomas: a systematic review”. BJOG, 2017, 124, 872-878.

[17] Holman L.L., Friedman S., Daniels M.S., Sun C.C., Lu K.H.: “Acceptability of prophylactic salpingectomy with delayed oophorectomy as risk-reducing surgery among BRCA mutation carriers”. Gynecol. Oncol., 2014, 133, 283-286.

[18] Rebbeck T.R., Kauff N.D., Domchek S.M.: “Meta-analysis of risk reduction estimates associated with risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy in BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation carriers”. J. Natl. Cancer Inst., 2009, 101, 80-87.

[19] Mehra K.K., Chang M.C., Folkins A.K., Raho C.J., Lima J.F., Yuan L., et al.: “The impact of tissue block sampling on the detection of p53 signatures in fallopian tubes from women with BRCA 1 or 2 mutations (BRCA+) and controls”. Mod. Pathol., 2011, 24, 152-156.

[20] Bahar-Shany K., Brand H., Sapoznik S., Jacob-Hirsch J., Yung Y., Korach J., et al.: “Exposure of fallopian tube epithelium to follicular fluid mimics carcinogenic changes in precursor lesions of serous papillary carcinoma”. Gynecol. Oncol., 2014, 132, 322-327.

[21] Modi D.A., Tagare R.D., Karthikeyan S., Russo A., Dean M., Davis D. A., et al.: “PAX2 function, regulation and targeting in fallopian tube-derived high-grade serous ovarian cancer”. Oncogene, 2017, 36, 3015-3024.

[22] Coccolini, F., L. Ansaloni, R. Manfredi, L. Campanati, E. Poiasina, P. Bertoli, M. G., et al.: “Peritoneal adhesion index (PAI): proposal of a score for the “ignored iceberg” of medicine and surger”. World Journal of Emergency Surgery, 2013, 8, 6.