It appears you don't have support to open PDFs in this web browser. To view this file, Open with your PDF reader
Abstract
Conservative management of endometrial cancer (CMEC) is viable for women with early-stage disease wishing to preserve fertility, but there is poor knowledge regarding clinicians’ attitudes towards treatment or guidelines adherence. This 55-item survey study investigated CMEC-related experience, practice and attitudes among clinically active Swedish gynecologists and gynecological oncologists, focusing on reproductive eligibility criteria. The survey consisted of a general and two specific subsets, selectively delivered to clinicians active in infertility (subset A) and endometrial cancer (subset B) care. Answers from 218 clinicians were included. More than half agreed on CMEC whereas only 5% explicitly disagreed. The majority supported a fertility work-up to substantiate reasonable chances to pregnancy and live birth. Most disagreed about CMEC in case of previous unsuccessful fertility treatments, while more than 1/3 disagreed about CMEC in known fertility problems, recurrent miscarriages or previous children. Over 50% of respondents in subset A (n = 107) found it applicable with fertility investigations such as ovarian reserve testing or, in case of male partner, semen analysis. Respondents in subset B (n = 165) agreed on items based on existing recommendations regarding the oncological management of CMEC, including the use of continuous progestins, hysteroscopic resection of macroscopic lesions, control biopsy with curettage or hysteroscopy after 6 months of treatment, pursuing pregnancy as soon as possible after complete response, and performing a hysterectomy once live birth is achieved. While many clinicians were familiar with CMEC, the overall experience is limited. Fertility specialists seem less involved than oncologists in patient care but there is broad support for fertility-related eligibility criteria.
You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimer
Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer
Details

1 Uppsala University, Department of Women’s and Children’s Health, Uppsala, Sweden (GRID:grid.8993.b) (ISNI:0000 0004 1936 9457)
2 Uppsala University, Department of Women’s and Children’s Health, Uppsala, Sweden (GRID:grid.8993.b) (ISNI:0000 0004 1936 9457); Karolinska Institutet, Department of Learning, Informatics, Management and Ethics (LIME), Stockholm, Sweden (GRID:grid.4714.6) (ISNI:0000 0004 1937 0626); Res Medica Sweden, Uppsala, Sweden (GRID:grid.4714.6)