Minimally Invasive Surgery in the Management of Advanced Epithelial Ovarian Cancer: A Comprehensive Analysis of...

Background and Objectives: Advanced epithelial ovarian cancer (AEOC) often requires extensive cytoreductive surgery. Minimally invasive surgery (MIS), especially diagnostic laparoscopy, is increasingly used to assess resectability and guide treatment. This review aimed to evaluate the evidence on MIS in AEOC, focusing on its diagnostic and therapeutic roles in primary and interval debulking surgery (PDS and IDS), and its impact on perioperative and oncologic outcomes. Materials and Methods: A structured literature review was performed using PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, and the Cochrane Library, including studies published between January 2000 and June 2025. Eligible studies involved laparoscopic or minimally invasive cytoreduction in PDS or IDS, reporting surgical feasibility, perioperative results, and oncologic outcomes. Data were synthesized qualitatively due to heterogeneity across studies. Results: Observational studies indicate that diagnostic laparoscopy predicts resectability, reduces futile laparotomies, and improves patient selection for primary surgery. In selected patients, non-randomized cohorts of laparoscopic PDS report R0 resection rates up to 95%, with low morbidity and short hospital stays. In IDS after neoadjuvant chemotherapy, MIS has been associated with reduced blood loss, fewer complications, and faster postoperative recovery, while showing progression-free and overall survival comparable to laparotomy in retrospective series. Conversion to open surgery was generally reported in fewer than 10% of cases when stringent selection criteria were applied. Conclusions: Diagnostic laparoscopy is a valuable tool for accurate preoperative evaluation and surgical planning in EOC. MIS, particularly for IDS, appears to offer reduced morbidity and equivalent survival outcomes when performed in experienced centers, whereas its application in PDS remains investigational and should be reserved for highly selected cases. These conclusions are limited by the predominance of retrospective evidence and the heterogeneity in patient selection and surgical expertise.