Total Abdominal Hysterectomy, Bilateral Salpingo-oophorectomy, and Pelvic Lymphadenectomy in Cancer Patients

  • Ninotchka Brydges
  • Lesley BoykoEmail author
  • Javier D. Lasala
Reference work entry


According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), it is estimated that 89,000 women in the United States are diagnosed with a gynecologic cancer annually [1]. It is estimated that over a million new cases and half million deaths are due to gynecological cancers occurring annually worldwide (Minig et al., Front Oncol 5:308, 2016). These cancers include ovarian, uterine, fallopian tube, cervical, vulvar, and vaginal. Surgical management involves a combination of tumor cytoreduction, hysterectomy, bilateral or single salpingo-oophorectomy, cervical conization, vulvectomy, wide local excision, lymphadenectomy, omentectomy, pelvic exenteration, laser, and radiation treatment. Surgical techniques include an open abdomen, laparoscopic, and robotic laparoscopic approach. Each different type of surgery poses different challenges to the surgical, medical, and anesthesia providers. Current literature supports the use of the enhanced recovery pathways (ERP), also called enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS). The goal of the pathway is to hasten surgical recovery and decrease the stress response through a team approach. Common ERP interventions include oral fluids and carbohydrate supplements up to 2 h prior to surgery, euvolemia, postoperative nausea/vomiting prophylaxis, early oral nutrition, and ambulation on first surgical day. Enhanced recovery after surgery minimizes the use of traditional care such as nasogastric tubes, bowel preparations, NPO after midnight, and excessive intravenous opioids (Nelson et al., Gynecol Oncol 35(3):586–594, 2014). Anesthesia teams require knowledge in using ERAS protocols in conjunction with a variety of medications and techniques. Enhanced recovery pathways are shown to reduce hospital stay and cost and are considered a standard of care for gynecological surgical patients at some hospitals [17]. The purpose of this chapter is to examine current data related to anesthetic management of patients undergoing surgery for gynecological malignancies and provide an overview of postoperative management.


Gynecological oncology Cancer Total abdominal hysterectomy Salpingo-oophorectomy Pelvic lymphadenectomy Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) Anesthesia team 


  1. 1.
    American Cancer Society. Survival rates for ovarian cancer by stage. 2018. Retrieved 16 July 2018
  2. 2.
    Asher R, Obermair A, Janda M, Gebski V. Disease-free and survival outcomes for total laparoscopic hysterectomy compared with total abdominal hysterectomy in early-stage endometrial carcinoma: a meta-analysis. Int J Gynecol Cancer Off J Int Gynecol Cancer Soc. 2018;28(3):529–38. Scholar
  3. 3.
    Binder PS, Prat J, Mutch DG. Molecular staging of gynecological cancer: what is the future? Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 2015;29(6):776–89. Scholar
  4. 4.
    Brinton LA, Thistle JE, Liao LM, Trabert B. Epidemiology of vulvar neoplasia in the NIH-AARP study. Gynecol Oncol. 2017;145(2):298–304. Scholar
  5. 5.
    Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Gynecologic cancers. 2018. Retrieved
  6. 6.
    Estridge P, Akoh JA. Recurrent spontaneous pneumoperitoneum: a surgical dilemma. Int J Surg Case Rep. 2017;30:103–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Han LY, Slomovitz BM, Soliman PT, Wolf JK. Gynecologic cancers. In: Feig BW, Ching CD, editors. The M.D. Anderson surgical oncology handbook. Philadelphia: Wolters Kluwer/Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2012. p. 478–509.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Joshi GP. Anesthesia for laparoscopic and abdominal robotic surgery in adults. 2017. Retrieved 5 July 2018
  9. 9.
    Karaman T, Ozsoy AZ, Karaman S, Dogru S, Tapar H, Sahin A, et al. The effects of transversus abdominis plane block on analgesic and anesthetic consumption during total abdominal hysterectomy: a randomized controlled study. [Efeitos do bloqueio do plano transverso abdominal sobre o consumo de analgesico e anestesico durante histerectomia abdominal total: um estudo randomico e controlado]. Rev Bras Anestesiol. 2018;68:285–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kumar K, Kirksey MA, Duong S, Wu CL. A review of opioid-sparing modalities in perioperative pain management: methods to decrease opioid use postoperatively. Anesth Analg. 2017;125(5):1749–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Lasala JD, Mena GE, Rodriguez-Restrepo A, Iniesta MD, Corzo C, Meyer LA, et al. Implementation of an enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) program in gynecologic surgery: the role of the anesthesiologist in opioid sparing. Clin Nutr ESPEN. 2017;19:81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Lee CL, Kusunoki S, Huang CY, Wu KY, Lee PS, Huang KG. Surgical and survival outcomes of laparoscopic staging surgery for patients with stage I ovarian cancer. Taiwan J Obstet Gynecol. 2018;57(1):7–12.
  13. 13.
    Minig L, Padilla-Iserte P, Zorrero C. The relevance of gynecologic oncologists to provide high-quality of care to women with gynecological cancer. Front Oncol. 2016;5:308.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Miralpeix E, Nick AM, Meyer LA, Cata J, Lasala J, Mena GE, et al. A call for new standard of care in perioperative gynecologic oncology practice: impact of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) programs. Gynecol Oncol. 2016;141(2):371–8. Epub 2016 Mar 9.
  15. 15.
    Nelson G, Dowdy SC, Lasala J, Mena G, Bakkum-Gamez J, Meyer LA, et al. Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS(R)) in gynecologic oncology - practical considerations for program development. Gynecol Oncol. 2017;147(3):617–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Nelson G, Kalogera E, Dowdy SC. Enhanced recovery pathways in gynecologic oncology. Gynecol Oncol. 2014;135(3):586–94. Scholar
  17. 17.
    Oliveira CRD, Bernardo WM, Nunes VM. Benefit of general anesthesia monitored by bispectral index compared with monitoring guided only by clinical parameters. Systematic review and meta-analysis. Rev Bras Anestesiol. 2017;67(1):72–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Panchgar V, Shetti AN, Sunitha HB, Dhulkhed VK, Nadkarni AV. The effectiveness of intravenous dexmedetomidine on perioperative hemodynamics, analgesic requirement, and side effects profile in patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery under general anesthesia. Anesth Essays Res. 2017;11(1):72–7. Scholar
  19. 19.
    Siegel RL, Miller KD, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2018. CA Cancer J Clin. 2018;68(1):7–30. Scholar
  20. 20.
    Standards for Basic Anesthetic Monitoring. Committee of Origin: Standards and Practice Parameters (Approved by the ASA House of Delegates on October 21, 1986, last amended on October 20, 2010, and last affirmed on October 28, 2016) (Accessed on May 06, 2019)
  21. 21.

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ninotchka Brydges
    • 1
  • Lesley Boyko
    • 2
    Email author
  • Javier D. Lasala
    • 3
    • 4
  1. 1.Department of Critical Care and Respiratory CareThe University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer CenterHoustonUSA
  2. 2.Division of Anesthesia, Critical Care and Pain MedicineThe University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer CenterHoustonUSA
  3. 3.Department of Anesthesiology and Perioperative MedicineThe University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer CenterHoustonUSA
  4. 4.Department of Anesthesiology, Critical Care and Pain MedicineUTMD Anderson Cancer CenterHoustonUSA

Section editors and affiliations

  • Garry Brydges
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Anesthesiology Division of Anesthesia, Critical Care and Pain MedicineThe University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer CenterHoustonUSA

Personalised recommendations