There is no feasible and reliable method for early diagnosis of ovarian cancer. The previously implemented method is: gynecological double examination + vaginal ultrasonography + blood CA125 test. However, the early diagnosis rate is still not high, and the percentage of advanced ovarian cancer at definite diagnosis is still high. Recently, the results of a study from the UK showed that ovarian cancer screening (CA125+ROCA+ultrasound) can reduce the mortality rate of this disease by 20%. At the same time, it is also reminded that screening is not completely harmless, for example, some women need surgical exploration that turns out to be benign ovarian lesions or normal ovarian tissue. However, some experts who analyzed the data from this study did not see a clear benefit for those who were screened and do not yet have sufficient evidence for mass promotion. It is evident that there is no feasible and reliable method for early diagnosis of ovarian cancer to date. Prophylactic ovariectomy, made known to the public by Angelina Jolie. Angelina Jolie chose to have her bilateral ovaries and fallopian tubes removed again 2 years after her prophylactic mastectomy in the absence of cancer. The reason is that she has a family history of breast cancer and has the BRCA1/2 gene (a gene that causes breast and ovarian cancer to develop) associated with breast and ovarian cancer. Prophylactic removal of the breast and ovaries has been proposed for more than 10 years in the United States, with hundreds of surgeries performed, and has been reported in our country. Why are preventive mastectomies and oophorectomies less commonly performed in our country? One reason is that we do not yet have an authoritative institution that can definitively test for this gene. The second reason is that we do not have enough knowledge about ovarian cancer, and we only realize the seriousness of ovarian cancer after our next of kin have developed ovarian cancer. The third reason is that our current medical environment is not suitable for the promotion of such radical surgery. The third reason is that our philosophical thinking about life is not objective enough, and the trade-off between quality of survival and years of survival is not rational enough. Should we choose to remove this organ when it is destined to become cancerous in the next few years? And once this cancer occurs, it is irreversible, should we choose to let nature take its course? Or should we actively prevent it? My personal opinion is that active prevention is better! Nowadays, there is a “pinhole” laparoscope (the puncture hole is only 2 mm), which can perform laparoscopy with less trauma. Therefore, it is recommended that: 1. Daughters and sisters of ovarian cancer patients should have regular targeted examinations, and after 35 years of age, preventive mastectomy, ovarian and tubal resection can be considered after the completion of reproductive tasks. 2.Postmenopausal women with enlarged ovaries should be considered for prophylactic oophorectomy and tubectomy. 3, For 5 cm ovarian occupying lesions should be actively treated with laparoscopic surgery. 4. Mixed ovarian occupying lesions of less than 5 cm with symptoms should also be actively treated with laparoscopy and a physical examination of the abdominal cavity. This is because, at present, only laparoscopy is able to obtain complete histological specimens for pathological histological examination (which is the gold standard for definitive diagnosis) and to comprehensively assess the abdominal cavity involvement. It provides the most objective evidence for further determination of treatment options.