Abstract：Objective To explore the relationship between the clinical features and prognosis of mucinous borderline ovarian tumors (M-BOTs). Methods The clinical data on 33 patients with M-BOTs was collected before the clinical features, pathological factors affecting prognosis and risk factors for tumor recurrence were analyzed retrospectively. Results All the patients underwent surgery as the initial treatment, 19 of whom (57.6%) underwent a radical procedure, and 14 (42.4%) underwent conservative surgery. Of these 33 patients, 13 (39.4%) underwent a staging procedure. With an average follow-up of 70 months (ranging from 10 to 130 months), the follow-up rate was 87.9%. Tumor recurred in eleven of these patients (33.3%, 11/33) and 2 cases (6.1%, 2/33) died of tumor progression. Univariate analysis showed that FIGO staging and types of surgical procedures were factors that influenced recurrence (P<0.05), but multivariate analysis showed that advanced FIGO staging (95% CI 0.115-1.369; P>0.05) and conservative surgery (95% CI 0.763-11.93; P>0.05) were not independent risk factors. Conclusions The majority of patients with M-BOTs have a favorable prognosis. Recurrence is more likely in patients with later-stage disease. Conservative surgery can be an option for early-stage patients who hope to remain fertile.
Lu Z, Chen J. Introduction of WHO classification of tumours of female reproductive organs, fourth edition [J]. Zhong Hua Bing Li Xue Za Zhi,2014,43(10):649-650.
[2]
Denny L, Quinn M. FIGO cancer report 2015[J]. Int J Gynaecol Obstet,2015,131(2):S75.
Prat J. Pathology of borderline and invasive cancers[J]. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol, 2017,41:15-30.
[5]
Karlsen N, Karlsen M A, Hogdall E, et al. Relapse and disease specific survival in 1143 Danish women diagnosed with borderline ovarian tumours (BOT)[J]. Gynecol Oncol,2016,142(1):50-53.
[6]
Dewilde K, Moerman P, Leunen K, et al. Staging with unilateral salpingo-oophorectomy and expert pathological review result in no recurrences in a series of 81 intestinal-type mucinous borderline ovarian tumors[J]. Gynecol Obstet Invest,2018,83(1):65-69.
Sun L, Li N, Song Y, et al. Clinicopathologic features and risk factors for recurrence of mucinous borderline ovarian tumors: a retrospective study with follow-up of more than 10 years[J]. Int J Gynecol Cancer,2018,28(9):1643-1649.
[9]
Khiat S, Provansal M, Bottin P, et al. Fertility preservation after fertility-sparing surgery in women with borderline ovarian tumours[J]. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol,2020,253:65-70.
[10]
Canfarotta M, Gillan E, Balarezo F, et al. Diagnosis, surgical treatment, and management of borderline ovarian surface epithelial neoplasms: report of 2 cases and review of literature[J].J Pediatric Surg Case Reports,2014,2(10):468-472.
[11]
Shih K K, Garg K, Soslow R A, et al. Accuracy of frozen section diagnosis of ovarian borderline tumor[J]. Gynecol Oncol,2011,123(3):517-521.
[12]
De Decker K, Speth S, Ter Brugge H G, et al. Staging procedures in patients with mucinous borderline tumors of the ovary do not reveal peritoneal or omental disease[J]. Gynecol Oncol, 2017,144(2):285-289.
Sangnier E, Ouldamer L, Bendifallah S, et al. Risk factors for recurrence of borderline ovarian tumors in france: a multicenter retrospective study by the FRANCOGYN group[J]. J Gynecol Obstet Hum Reprod,2021,50(4):101961.
[15]
Yoshida A, Tavares B, Sarian L O, et al. Clinical features and management of women with borderline ovarian tumors in a single center in brazil[J]. Rev Bras Ginecol Obstet,2019, 41(3):176-182.
[16]
Plett H, Harter P, Ataseven B, et al. Fertility-sparing surgery and reproductive-outcomes in patients with borderline ovarian tumors[J]. Gynecol Oncol,2020,157(2):411-417.
2021, Vol. 32 
