Insight
When surgery spreads cancer: A silent killer in women’s health
By Daniela Schardinger
For decades, women’s health has been sidelined, underfunded, and overlooked. While progress is being made, some of the most serious threats to women’s health remain hidden in plain sight.
One of the biggest risks is something few women are ever warned about – the silent spread of undiagnosed cancer during routine gynecologic surgery.
Every year, millions of women undergo hysterectomies, myomectomies, and adnexal mass removals due to common uterine conditions – such as uterine fibroids (myomas), which affect 7 in 10 women and 8 in 10 women of colour, making them the leading cause of hysterectomy.
While these surgeries can be medically necessary, they carry an often-overlooked danger – one that can mean the difference between life and death.
Research shows that 1 in 350 women undergoing a hysterectomy or myomectomy has undiagnosed cancer, and for adnexal mass removals, that number is 1 in 100.
If these procedures are performed without proper containment, cancerous cells can spread, drastically lowering survival rates.
Despite these publicly recognised risks that led to hundreds of million-dollar lawsuits a decade ago, hospitals have been shockingly slow to adopt the safest surgical techniques, putting women at unnecessary risk.
The Risk No One Talks About
To minimise scarring and speed up recovery, most gynecologic surgeries are performed laparoscopically, using a technique that is called morcellation – to breaks down larger tissue to small pieces and removing them through a small incision.
When power morcellators were banned in 2014 due to their potential to spread undiagnosed cancer, many assumed the problem had been solved.
But instead of developing safer alternatives, surgeons simply switched to manual morcellation, often using simple bags that are not designed or approved for that use and rupture at alarmingly high rates.
Some hospitals still rely on non-FDA-cleared surgical bags that rupture up to 30 per cent of the time, while even common FDA-cleared containment systems have a 15 per cent failure rate.
This means that women undergoing these procedures are still at risk of cancerous cell spillage – a risk that could and should have been eliminated by now.
Uterine cancer is one of the slowest cancers to be detected, often remaining asymptomatic until later stages.
This makes the risk of undiagnosed malignancy during surgery particularly concerning.
Since current preoperative screenings are not always conclusive, it is imperative to use the safest possible containment techniques to prevent the spread of cancerous cells during gynecologic procedures.
In the U.S. alone, safer containment systems have the potential to protect 400,000 women annually from unnecessary cancer spread.
And it’s not just cancer that’s a concern.
Uncontained morcellation can also spread endometrial cells, potentially leading to or exacerbating endometriosis, a painful and often debilitating condition.
Even benign tissue, if dispersed in the abdominal cavity, can adhere to other organs, causing complications such as bowel obstructions, chronic pain, and diminished quality of life.
These risks are entirely preventable when the right containment tools are used – yet outdated practices continue, leaving women vulnerable to life-altering consequences.
As Dr. Vadim Morozov, MD, puts it:
“As a surgeon, I’ve seen firsthand the devastating consequences of uncontained morcellation. The risk is real, and it’s preventable. We wouldn’t operate with a ruptured glove – so why would we operate with a ruptured containment bag?”
Innovation Exists – So Why Aren’t We Using It?
The frustrating reality is that safer solutions already exist.
Companies have developed advanced double-wall containment systems cleared by the FDA and designed to significantly reduce the risk of surgical spillage, ensuring that even if an undiagnosed cancer is present, it won’t spread during surgery.
These advanced containment solutions offer a much-needed safety net, providing surgeons with a tool to minimise the risk of surgical spillage and enhance patient safety.
However, many hospitals still rely on outdated techniques that were neither designed nor cleared for this use.
They are not required to adopt improved systems, and there are no universal guidelines mandating best practices.
Some hospitals continue using cheaper bags that lack FDA approval for such procedures, while others forego containment altogether due to outdated surgical habits.
And all of this happens without the patient’s awareness, as hospitals are left to govern and monitor themselves.
This raises an urgent question: Why are hospitals not moving faster to protect women?
Regulatory bodies, OB-GYN associations and hospitals must catch up with the pace of innovation. If safer solutions exist, they should be the standard – not the exception.
A Call to Action: Stop Preventable Cancer and Endometriosis Spread in Surgery
Startups and innovators are already making strides in this space, developing better containment systems and safer gynecologic surgical techniques. But they can’t do it alone.
- Hospitals must prioritise adopting proven containment systems to eliminate surgical spillage risks.
- Regulatory bodies must issue clearer guidelines enforcing the use of safer techniques.
- Investors and global healthcare players must help scale innovations in this space.
Now, the question is: Will we step up and make it standard, or will we continue to let outdated practices be a silent killer of women?
It’s time for action. Women deserve better.
Daniela Schardinger is a recognised thought leader in women’s health innovation, dedicated to advancing FemTech, medical advancements, and global health initiatives. She serves on the Innovation Equity Steering Committee at the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and NIH, shaping policies that drive investment and innovation in women’s health.
Daniela has been a speaker and participant at World Economic Forum Innovator events and the Global Women’s Health Alliance meetings in New York, contributing to high-level discussions on the future of women’s healthcare.
She has been recognised as one of Forbes’ “Superwomen”, a 40 Under 40 honoree, recipient of the Visionary Award from the California State Senate, and named an Inspirational Woman by the LA Times.
Most recently, she was honored as the Woman of Influence 2025 Advocate of the Year by a U.S. Chamber of Commerce for her dedication to transforming women’s health globally.
LGBTQ+ people across the UK face discrimination, funding inequalities and gaps in fertility care, research has found.
Eligibility for NHS-funded treatment varies across the country, while many services are still structured around heterosexual couples.
People with diverse sexual orientations and gender identities can be left navigating complex systems, paying more for treatment and explaining their needs to healthcare professionals.
Co-author Dr Chloe He, of the UCL Institute of Epidemiology and Health Care, said: “Legal access is not the same as equitable access. LGBTQ+ patients are forced to navigate a Kafkaesque fertility care system alone – researching, self-advocating, and often educating the doctors and nurses treating them.
“In our study, we saw clinicians with no formal LGBTQ+ training, gay men pressured into being relentlessly cheerful to prove parent-worthiness to surrogacy services, and patients travelling hundreds of miles for care after experiencing transphobia at local clinics.”
The University of Stirling-led research involved 54 participants and 36 in-depth interviews with people who had used fertility services and professionals working in or alongside fertility care across the UK.
Researchers from Stirling, SKEMA Business School and University College London examined the extra work undertaken by LGBTIQA+ people seeking to have children.
They called this “reproductive labour”, which includes researching treatment, advocating for themselves, covering additional costs and educating clinicians.
The researchers said this work was used to manage “reproductive bioprecarity”, a term describing the uncertainty and vulnerability people can face while seeking reproductive healthcare.
The study, funded by a Santander Universities Research Grant, primarily reflected the experiences of cisgender lesbian participants.
One participant, Amanda, said she and her partner, Amy, spent a long time trying to find a GP willing to discuss fertility with them.
The couple eventually underwent fertility tests through the NHS, but their private clinic rejected the results because they had not been referred by a GP.
They had to repeat the tests and pay for them privately.
The researchers said lesbian couples are often required to self-fund multiple rounds of intrauterine insemination before becoming eligible for NHS support.
Intrauterine insemination, or IUI, involves placing sperm directly into the womb.
Gay men usually have to pursue surrogacy, which is not funded or supported by the NHS, while transgender people can face long waits to save eggs and sperm to allow them to have children.
Lead author Dr Carolyn Wilson-Nash, senior lecturer at the University of Stirling Business School, began investigating the issue after she and her wife made multiple attempts to conceive and faced challenges throughout the process.
The couple funded almost the entire process themselves and consulted a GP who had no experience of supporting same-sex couples seeking fertility care.
The researchers called for clearer treatment pathways, more inclusive services and better training for healthcare staff.
Dr Wilson-Nash, who is now the mother of a three-year-old boy, said: “The way the current system for fertility services is set up in the UK can lead to unequal pathways for the LGBTIQA+ population.
“For example, heterosexual couples can access NHS-funded in vitro fertilisation (IVF), whereas lesbian couples are often required to self-fund multiple rounds of intrauterine insemination (IUI) before becoming eligible for NHS support.
“Gay men usually have to pursue surrogacy, which is not funded by or supported by the NHS.
“And transgender individuals often face long waiting times to save eggs and sperm to allow them to have children. So legal access does not necessarily translate into equitable or inclusive care.
“Building a family should be neither exclusive nor this difficult. Fertility services should be available to all, regardless of their sexual orientation or gender identity.”
Laura-Rose Thorogood, founder of LGBT Mummies and part of the UK’s Fertility Justice Campaign, said: “Right now, intended LGBTQIA+ parents are being discriminated against because of who they are, and who they love.
“This is ultimately forcing them down alternative pathways which in turn put them at long-term risk physically, psychologically and socially.
“By providing access to treatment, our community can thrive and create the families they dream of by their chosen route.”
A sold-out summit at the London Institute for Healthcare Engineering will bring together clinicians, researchers, regulators, investors and founders to discuss how artificial intelligence is being applied to women’s health, and what responsible development of these tools should look like.
AI × Women’s Health: Innovation, Challenges and Opportunities takes place on 25 June.
It’s organised by MEGI Health, a femtech company building a digital cardiovascular platform aimed at supporting women’s heart health through pregnancy, postpartum and beyond.
All 140 places have gone, and there’s now a waiting list.
Nina Sesto, CEO of MEGI Health, said: “We are seeing a wave of innovation in women’s health, and AI has the potential to accelerate it.
“The opportunity is enormous, but it only pays off if these tools are built on representative data and designed around the realities of women’s health.
“That is exactly the conversation we wanted to convene, across clinicians, researchers, industry and regulators.”
AI is increasingly being applied across women’s healthcare, with proponents pointing to earlier diagnosis, better risk prediction and more personalised care.
The summit will look at tools in development across fetal and gynaecological ultrasound, maternal cardiovascular monitoring and clinical decision support, alongside the question of whether women risk being left behind as the technology develops.
The timing reflects wider momentum in the sector: women’s health has been drawing more investment and policy attention, and the World Economic Forum and McKinsey Health Institute have estimated that closing the women’s health gap could add at least $1 trillion a year to the global economy by 2040.
A recurring theme for the day is data.
Women have historically been under-represented in medical research, and organisers argue that AI tools trained on incomplete or unrepresentative datasets risk repeating those gaps rather than closing them.
Sessions on data, ethics, privacy and equity will run alongside the more technical and commercial discussions.
Dr Fran Conti-Ramsden is a clinician at Guy’s and St Thomas’ NHS Foundation Trust, academic at King’s College London and Chief Medical Officer of MEGI Health.
Conti-Ramsden said: “Working at the intersection of clinical practice, academia and industry, I see both the tremendous challenges we face in delivering clinical care for women and the need for innovation, alongside the rapid development of AI and digital health technologies.
“But bringing innovation into clinical practice is fraught with challenges.
“I hope this day brings together people from across the landscape to discuss and define those challenges as well as celebrate progress in the field, sparking dialogue on how we should innovate responsibly, and to make sure women’s health is not left behind.”
The half-day programme is split into four sessions, chaired respectively by Professor Eugene Oteng-Ntim, Professor Richard Dobson, an interactive breakout segment, and Professor Asma Khalil. Other speakers include MiRa Jacobs (MHRA), Professor Jane Hirst (The George Institute), Tulsi Patel (Hertility) and Dr Kimberley Peven (Scarlet), among others.
Organisers say they hope the event will help build a longer-term UK community around clinical AI in women’s health.
Senior executives from the World Economic Forum, Takeda and Gilead are among the latest speakers confirmed for Women’s HealthX, which takes place on 3–4 December 2026 in Boston, Massachusetts, as the event publishes its full agenda.
The newly announced speakers are Melissa Patel, lead for women’s health responsible investing at the World Economic Forum; Nicola Greenway, chief human resources officer at Takeda; and Jyoti Mehra, executive vice president of human resources at Gilead.
They join more than 75 confirmed speakers and a delegate list the organisers say will exceed 750 leaders from pharma and biotech, hospitals and health systems, payers and policymakers, all focused on closing the sex-difference data gap in healthcare.
Organisations registered to attend span much of the sector.
In pharma and biotech they include Novartis, Merck, Sanofi, AstraZeneca, Eli Lilly, Bayer, Biogen, Johnson & Johnson, Gilead Sciences, Takeda, UCB, Astellas, EMD Serono, Amgen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Boehringer Ingelheim and Chiesi.
Among hospitals, health systems and academic medical centres are Mayo Clinic, Mass General Brigham, Northwell Health, UPMC, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Weill Cornell Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Northwestern Medicine, Mount Sinai Health System, UMass Memorial Medical Center, Tufts Medical Center, Yale School of Medicine, Harvard Medical School, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, University of Pennsylvania Health System and NYU Langone Health.
Payers and health plans represented include CVS Health, Humana, Cigna Healthcare, Kaiser Permanente, Elevance Health, Blue Cross Blue Shield of Tennessee, Blue Cross Blue Shield of Massachusetts, Evernorth, Fidelis Care, Health Plans Inc and UPMC Health Plan.
On the government, policy and regulatory side, attendees include the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, ARPA-H, the FDA, HHS, the NYC Department of Health and Mental Hygiene, Metro Public Health Department, the Association of State and Territorial Health Officials, the NHS, the Northern Mariana Islands Board of Nursing and Planned Parenthood of Florida.
A sample attendee list is available here.
Newly confirmed panels
Patel will join Sheri Schully, deputy chief medical and scientific officer at the All of Us Research Program, and Lindsey Miltenberger, chief advocacy officer at the Society for Women’s Health Research, for a panel titled “Driving Inclusive Health Research on a Global Scale: Using Data to Understand National Priorities and Address Critical Gaps in Women’s Health.”
The session will look at the health priorities countries are focusing on today and how data can be used to identify gaps in women’s health that remain overlooked.
Greenway and Mehra will take part in a panel titled “Empowering Workforces Through Women’s Health,” in which corporate health leaders discuss women’s health priorities from both employee and employer perspectives, and which benefits organisations should be prioritising.
The full agenda is now available, and registration is open.
Hormonal health4 weeks agoPerimenopause misinformation ‘putting women at risk’
Entrepreneur4 weeks agoWomen’s Health Innovation Summit opens submissions for 2026 Innovation Showcase
Insight3 weeks agoBritish women among angriest in Europe, health survey reveals
Menopause4 weeks agoWomen still being failed when they reach menopause, experts say
Menopause4 weeks agoSweden eyes domestic production of oestrogen patches amid menopause treatment shortage
Menopause2 weeks agoApple Health adds menopause and perimenopause tracking
News2 weeks agoFemtech World Awards 2026: Winners revealed
News4 weeks agoThree menopause innovators shortlisted for Femtech World Award