Cytoreductive Surgery in the Management of Advanced Ovarian Cancer: Experience and Outcome Analysis

Introduction. Ovarian cancer remains one of the leading causes of cancer‑related mortality among women. Globally, approximately 200,000 new cases and 100,000 deaths are reported annually. Most ovarian tumors are diagnosed at an advanced stage, while only 25–30 % are detected early. In advanced disease, the primary objective of surgical treatment is complete cytoreduction of all macroscopically visible disease, as this factor is strongly associated with improved overall survival and longer progression‑free intervals. Aim. This study evaluated the effect of complete cytoreductive surgery on early postoperative complications, mortality, and long‑term overall survival in patients with advanced ovarian cancer.

Materials and methods. We conducted a retrospective review of medical records for patients who underwent primary cytoreductive surgery for advanced ovarian cancer at the Kurgan Regional Oncology Center between 1 January 2017 and 1 January 2025.

Results and discussion. A total of 54 women underwent cytoreductive surgery. Complete cytoreduction was achieved in 90.7% (n = 49), while 9.3 % (n = 5) had residual disease. The number of adjacent organs resected ranged from 1 (53.6 %) to 5 (5.6 %), with a mean of 2.02 ± 1.28. Postoperative complications occurred in 51.9% (n = 28) of patients; grade IV complications occurred in 5.6 % (n = 3) and grade V in 1.9% (n = 1) according to the Clavien–Dindo classification. Mean operative time was 365.61 ± 176.08 minutes (range of 90–820 minutes). Importantly, patients who underwent complete cytoreduction did not exhibit higher rates of severe postoperative complications or mortality (Clavien–Dindo grades IV–V).

Conclusion. A more extensive surgical approach is justified in selected patients with advanced ovarian cancer and is associated with improved survival. However, careful patient selection is essential, as overall preoperative status may significantly influence survival outcomes.

1. Kaprin A.D, Starinsky V.V., Shakhzadova A.O. State of cancer care for population in Russia in 2024. − Moscow: P.A. Herzen Moscow Research Oncolofy Institute — branch of the National Medical Research Center for Radiology, Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation, 2025 (In Russ.).

2. Merabishvili V.M., Bakhidze E.V., Urmancheeva A.F., Gorodnova T.V., Ulrich E.A., Belyaeva A.V., et al. Cancer care in Russia: ovarian cancer, prevalence, registration quality, survival (clinical and population study). Voprosy Onkologii. 2025;71(2):306–17 (In Russ.). DOI: 10.37469/0507-3758-2025-71-2-306-317

3. Lin Q., Liu W., Guo Y., Wang X. Secondary cytoreductive surgery in platinum-sensitive relapsed ovarian cancer: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2025;311(2):405–14. DOI: 10.1007/s00404-024-07863-x

4. Vitale S.G., Marilli I., Lodato M., Tropea A., Cianci A.The role of cytoreductive surgery in advanced-stage ovarian cancer: a systematic review. Updates Surg. 2013;65:265–70. DOI: 10.1007/s13304-013-0213-4

5. Fumagalli D., Jayraj A., Olearo E., Capasso I., Hsu H.C., Tzur Y., et al. Primary versus interval cytoreductive surgery in patients with rare epithelial or non-epithelial ovarian cancer. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2025;35(3):101664. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijgc.2025.101664

6. Turomsha A.N., Protasova A.E., Raskin G.A., Kravtsova E.D., Andreev A.L., Strakh L.V., et al. Ovarian cancer in situ: a case report. Tumors of female reproductive system. 2024;20(3):95–8 (In Russ.). DOI: 10.17650/1994-4098-2024-20-3-95-98

7. Smirnova A.V., Malyshkina A.I., Khrushkova E.P. Characteristics in early diagnosis of ovarian masses. Russian Journal of Woman and Child Health. 2023;6(2):105–11 (In Russ.). DOI: 10.32364/2618-8430-2023-6-2-105-111

8. Lheureux S., Braunstein M., Oza A.M. Epithelial ovarian cancer: evolution of management in the era of precision medicine. CA Cancer J Clin. 2019;69(4):280–304. DOI: 10.3322/caac.21559

9. Arab M., Jamdar F., Sadat Hosseini M., Ghodssi- Ghasemabadi R., Farzaneh F., Ashrafganjoei T. Model for prediction of optimal debulking of epithelial ovarian cancer. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev. 2018;19(5):1319–24. DOI: 10.22034/APJCP.2018.19.5.1319

10. Onda T., Satoh T., Ogawa G., Saito T., Kasamatsu T., Nakanishi T., et al. Comparison of survival between primary debulking surgery and neoadjuvant chemotherapy for stage III/IV ovarian, tubal and peritoneal cancers in phase III randomised trial. Eur J Cancer. 2020;130:114–25. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejca.2020.02.020

11. Narasimhulu D.M., Bews K.A., Hanson K.T., Chang Y.H., Dowdy S.C., Cliby W.A. Using evidence to direct quality improvement efforts: Defining the highest impact complications after complex cytoreductive surgery for ovarian cancer. Gynecol Oncol. 2020;156(2):278–83. DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2019.11.007

12. Wimberger P., Lehmann N., Kimmig R., Burges A., Meier W., Du Bois A., et al. Prognostic factors for complete debulking in advanced ovarian cancer and its impact on survival. An exploratory analysis of a prospectively randomized phase III study of the Arbeitsgemeinschaft Gynaekologische Onkologie Ovarian Cancer Study Group (AGO-OVAR). Gynecol Oncol. 2007;106(1):69–74. DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2007.02.026

13. Morrison J., Swanton A., Collins S., Kehoe S. Chemotherapy versus surgery for initial treatment in advanced ovarian epithelial cancer. Cochrane Database System Rev. 2007;(4):CD005343. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD005343.pub2

14. Ye S., He T., Liang S., Chen X., Wu X., Yang H., et al. Diaphragmatic surgery and related complications in primary cytoreduction for advanced ovarian, tubal, and peritoneal carcinoma. BMC Cancer. 2017;17(1):317. DOI: 10.1186/s12885-017-3311-8

15. Bartels H.C., Rogers A.C., McSharry V., McVey R., Walsh T., O’Brien D., et al. A meta-analysis of morbidity and mortality in primary cytoreductive surgery compared to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in advanced ovarian malignancy. Gynecol Oncol. 2019;154(3):622– 30. DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2019.07.011

16. Cliby W.A., Powell M.A., Al-Hammadi N., Chen L., Philip Miller J., Roland P.Y., et al. Ovarian cancer in the United States: contemporary patterns of care associated with improved survival. Gynecol Oncol. 2015;136(1):11–7. DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2014.10.023

17. Jeon S., Lee S.J., Lim M.C., Song T., Bae J., Kim K., et al. Surgical manual of the Korean Gynecologic Oncology Group: ovarian, tubal, and peritoneal cancers. J Gynecol Oncol. 2017;28(1):e6. DOI: 10.3802/jgo.2017.28.e6

18. Sinno A.K., Li X., Thompson R.E., Tanner E.J. 3rd, Levinson K.L., Stone R.L., et al. Trends and factors associated with radical cytoreductive surgery in the United States: A case for centralized care. Gynecol Oncol. 2017;145(3):493–9. DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2017.03.020

19. Mueller J.J., Lajer H., Mosgaard B.J., Bach Hamba S., Morice P., Gouy S., et al. International study of primary mucinous ovarian carcinomas managed at tertiary medical centers. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2018;28(5):915–24. DOI: 10.1097/IGC.0000000000001263

20. ClinicalTrials. Gov. Trial on Radical Upfront Surgery in Advanced Ovarian Cancer (TRUST). Available from: https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT02828618 [cited 2025 Aug 7].

21. Shi T., Chen Y., Jiang R., Xiang L., Liu J., Zhu J., et al. Optimal timing of primary debulking surgery in advanced ovarian cancer: insights from the TRUST trial. J Gynecol Oncol. 2025;36(5):e132. DOI: 10.3802/jgo.2025.36.e132

22. Dahm-Kähler P., Rådestad A.F., Holmberg E., Borgfeldt C., Bjurberg M., Sköld C., et al. Has time to chemotherapy from primary debulking surgery in advanced ovarian cancer an impact on survival? — A population-based nationwide SweGCG study. Gynecol Oncol. 2024;186:69–76. DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2024.03.011

23. Vasilkin D.I., Dambaev G.Ts., Soloviev M.M., Fatyushina O.A., Vlasov A.A. Compression anastomoses in colon surgery (literature review). Issues of Reconstructive and Plastic Surgery. 2023;26(1):15–29 (In Russ.). DOI: 10.52581/1814-1471/84/02