{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.0108499095840868, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.2897727272727275, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Supporting the wider use of laparoscopy in the treatment of ovarian masses

Patients with ovarian masses which have a moderate risk of malignancy are frequently treated by open laparotomy, despite the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists (RCOG) guidance indicating that laparoscopic oophorectomy may be performed in selected cases. The reluctance to perform laparoscopic surgery in these cases is normally due to the perception that survival is affected if the mass is subsequently diagnosed as being malignant, the risk of rupture impacting on FIGO stage and the need for additional staging surgery. However, there is no good evidence to support these views. Preoperative diagnosis of ovarian masses is limited and thus a significant number of patients are subjected to open surgery, where they may have benefitted from the advantages of laparoscopic surgery. We argue that in the absence of a definitive preoperative test, there are advantages to the laparoscopic approach in patients who have a moderate risk of malignancy and further high level evidence should be encouraged in this field.