Precision cancer surgery is a system that integrates the accurate evaluation of tumor extension and aggressiveness, precise surgical maneuvers, prognosis evaluation, and prevention of the deterioration of quality of life (QoL). In this regard, nerve-sparing radical hysterectomy has a pivotal role in the personalized treatment of cervical cancer. Various types of radical hysterectomy can be combined with the nerve-sparing procedure. The extent of parametrium and vagina/paracolpium excision and the nerve-sparing procedure are tailored to the tumor status. Advanced magnetic resonance imaging technology will improve the assessment of the local tumor extension. Validated risk factors for perineural invasion might guide selecting treatment for cervical cancer. Type IV Kobayashi (modified Okabayashi) radical hysterectomy combined with the systematic nerve-sparing procedure aims to both maximize the therapeutic effect and minimize the QoL impairment. Regarding the technical aspect, the preservation of vesical nerve fibers is essential. Selective transection of uterine nerve fibers conserves the vesical nerve fibers as an essential piece of the pelvic nervous system comprising the hypogastric nerve, pelvic splanchnic nerves, and inferior hypogastric plexus. This method is anatomically and surgically valid for adequate removal of the parametrial and vagina/paracolpium tissues while preserving the total pelvic nervous system. Local recurrence after nerve-sparing surgery might occur due to perineural invasion or inadequate separation of pelvic nerves cutting through the wrong tissue plane between the pelvic nerves and parametrium/paracolpium. Postoperative management for long-term maintenance of bladder function is as critical as preserving the pelvic nerves.

OBJECTIVE: According to the International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics staging, some surgeons perform lymphadenectomy in all patients with early stage endometrial cancer to enable the accurate staging. However, there are some risks to lymphadenectomy such as lower limb lymphedema. The aim of this study was to investigate whether preoperative assessment is useful to select the patients in whom lymphadenectomy can be safely omitted. METHODS: We evaluated the risk of lymph node metastasis (LNM) using LNM score (histological grade, tumor volume measured in magnetic resonance imaging [MRI], and serum CA-125), myometrial invasion and extrautrerine spread assessed by MRI. Fifty-six patients of which LNM score was 0 and myometrial invasion was less than 50% were consecutively enrolled in the study in which a lymphadenectomy was initially intended not to perform. We analyzed several histological findings and investigated the recurrence rate and overall survival. RESULTS: Fifty-one patients underwent surgery without lymphadenectomy. Five (8.9%) who had obvious myometrial invasion intraoperatively underwent systematic lymphadenectomy. One (1.8%) with endometrial cancer which was considered to arise from adenomyosis had para-aortic LNM. Negative predictive value of deep myometrial invasion was 96.4% (54/56). During the mean follow-up period of 55 months, one patient with deep myometrial invasion who refused an adjuvant therapy had tumor recurrence. The overall survival rate was 100% during the study period. CONCLUSION: This preoperative assessment is useful to select the early stage endometrial cancer patients without risk of LNM and to safely omit lymphadenectomy.
Adult ; Aged ; CA-125 Antigen/blood ; Endometrial Neoplasms/pathology/*surgery ; Female ; Humans ; *Lymph Node Excision ; Lymphatic Metastasis ; Magnetic Resonance Imaging/methods ; Middle Aged ; Neoplasm Invasiveness ; Neoplasm Recurrence, Local ; Neoplasm Staging ; Postoperative Care/methods ; Preoperative Care/methods ; Prognosis ; Survival Analysis ; Unnecessary Procedures

Objectives: This review aims to introduce preoperative scoring systems to predict lymph node metastasis (LNM) and ongoing clinical trials to investigate the therapeutic role of lymphadenectomy for endometrial cancer. Methods: We summarized previous reports on the preoperative prediction models for LNM and evaluated their validity to omit lymphadenectomy in our recent cohorts. Next, we compared characteristics of two ongoing lymphadenectomy trials (JCOG1412, ECLAT) to examine the survival benefit of lymphadenectomy in endometrial cancer, and described the details of JCOG1412. Results: Lymphadenectomy has been omitted for 64 endometrial cancer patients who met lowrisk criteria to omit lymphadenectomy using our scoring system (LNM score) and no lymphatic failure has been observed. Other two models also produced comparable results. Two randomized phase III trials to evaluate survival benefit of lymphadenectomy are ongoing for endometrial cancer. JCOG1412 compares pelvic lymphadenectomy alone with pelvic and para-aortic lymphadenectomy to evaluate the therapeutic role of para-aortic lymphadenectomy for patients at risk of LNM. For quality assurance of lymphadenectomy, we defined several regulations, including lower limit of the number of resected nodes, and submission of photos of dissected area to evaluate thoroughness of lymphadenectomy in the protocol. The latest monitoring report showed that the quality of lymphadenectomy has been well-controlled in JCOG1412. Conclusion Our strategy seems reasonable to omit lymphadenectomy and could be generalized in clinical practice. JCOG1412 is a high-quality lymphadenectomy trial in terms of the quality of surgical procedures, which would draw the bona-fide conclusions regarding the therapeutic role of lymphadenectomy for endometrial cancer.

Background/Aims: Immune checkpoint blockade has recently been reported to be effective in treating microsatellite instability (MSI)-high tumors. Therefore, sufficient sampling of histological specimens is necessary in cases of unresectable pancreatic cancer (UR-PC). This multicenter study investigated the efficacy of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy (EUS-FNB) using a Franseen needle for MSI evaluation in patients with UR-PC. Methods: A total of 89 patients with UR-PC who underwent endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) or EUS-FNB using 22-G needles at three hospitals in Japan (2018–2021) were enrolled. Fifty-six of these patients (FNB 23 and FNA 33) were followed up or evaluated for MSI. Patient characteristics, UR-PC data, and procedural outcomes were compared between patients who underwent EUS-FNB and those who underwent EUS-FNA. Results: No significant difference in terms of sufficient tissue acquisition for histology was observed between patients who underwent EUS-FNB and those who underwent EUS-FNA. MSI evaluation was possible significantly more with tissue samples obtained using EUS-FNB than with tissue samples obtained using EUS-FNA (82.6% [19/23] vs. 45.5% [15/33], respectively; p<0.01). In the multivariate analysis, EUS-FNB was the only significant factor influencing the possibility of MSI evaluation. Conclusions EUS-FNB using a Franseen needle is desirable for ensuring sufficient tissue acquisition for MSI evaluation.