Literature DB >> 17005244

Ovarian cancer: patterns of surgical care across the United States.

Barbara A Goff1, Barbara J Matthews, Michelle Wynn, Howard G Muntz, Denise M Lishner, Laura-Mae Baldwin.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To describe the primary surgical procedures and procedures for intraoperative and postoperative complications, and factors associated with these procedures, in women with ovarian cancer.
METHODS: Using hospital discharge data from nine states, obtained from the Heath Care Cost and Utilization Project from 1999 to 2002, we evaluated 10,432 women with a primary diagnosis of ovarian cancer who underwent at least an oophorectomy for additional procedural ICD-9 codes during their initial hospitalization.
RESULTS: Surgical procedures performed in addition to oophorectomy included: omentectomy/debulking 81.9%, hysterectomy 73.4%, lymph node dissection 41.4%, appendectomy 23.8%, bowel procedures 19.8%, laparoscopy 5.6%, diaphragmatic procedures 4.9%, colostomy 3.5%, and splenectomy 1.2%. Transfusions were given to 15.5% of patients. Intraoperative and postoperative procedures for complications were coded in 7.4% of patients, including repair of surgical injury 3.5%, procedures for cardiopulmonary complications 2.8%, reoperation 1.1%, and infection treatment 0.3%. In early stage disease 21.4% of women received no additional staging procedures and 46.8% did not have nodal sampling. In bivariate analysis of crude rates, factors associated with lymph node dissection were patient age, race, payer, teaching hospital status, hospital and surgeon volume, and surgeon specialty, p<.01. for all observations. Colostomies were performed by general surgeons in 23.1% of cases, by gynecologic oncologists in 2.7% of cases, and by obstetrician/gynecologists in no cases, p<.001. Complications were associated with age, payer, median household income, and stage, p<.001 for all observations. Complication rates were similar for low- and high-volume hospitals and surgeons. However, in higher volume settings, significantly more patients received debulking procedures, lymph node dissections, and additional surgical procedures, p<.001 for all observations.
CONCLUSIONS: A significant percentage of women with ovarian cancer did not receive recommended surgical procedures. Almost 50% of women with early stage disease were not adequately staged and in women with advanced disease, the percentage who had additional surgical procedures such as bowel resections was much lower than in institutions that report high optimal cytoreduction rates.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 17005244     DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2006.08.010

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Gynecol Oncol        ISSN: 0090-8258            Impact factor:   5.482


  29 in total

1.  Spatial analysis of adherence to treatment guidelines for advanced-stage ovarian cancer and the impact of race and socioeconomic status.

Authors:  Robert E Bristow; Jenny Chang; Argyrios Ziogas; Hoda Anton-Culver; Veronica M Vieira
Journal:  Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2014-03-25       Impact factor: 5.482

2.  Trends in treatment of advanced epithelial ovarian cancer in the Medicare population.

Authors:  Melissa M Thrall; Heidi J Gray; Rebecca Gaston Symons; Noel S Weiss; David R Flum; Barbara A Goff
Journal:  Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2011-04-15       Impact factor: 5.482

3.  Spatial analysis of advanced-stage ovarian cancer mortality in California.

Authors:  Robert E Bristow; Jenny Chang; Argyrios Ziogas; Daniel L Gillen; Lu Bai; Veronica M Vieira
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2015-01-31       Impact factor: 8.661

4.  Impact of National Cancer Institute Comprehensive Cancer Centers on ovarian cancer treatment and survival.

Authors:  Robert E Bristow; Jenny Chang; Argyrios Ziogas; Belinda Campos; Leo R Chavez; Hoda Anton-Culver
Journal:  J Am Coll Surg       Date:  2015-02-14       Impact factor: 6.113

5.  Trends and factors associated with radical cytoreductive surgery in the United States: A case for centralized care.

Authors:  A K Sinno; X Li; R E Thompson; E J Tanner; K L Levinson; R L Stone; S M Temkin; A N Fader; D S Chi; K Long Roche
Journal:  Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2017-03-30       Impact factor: 5.482

6.  Observed-to-expected ratio for adherence to treatment guidelines as a quality of care indicator for ovarian cancer.

Authors:  Valerie B Galvan-Turner; Jenny Chang; Argyrios Ziogas; Robert E Bristow
Journal:  Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2015-09-24       Impact factor: 5.482

7.  Socioeconomic status as a predictor of adherence to treatment guidelines for early-stage ovarian cancer.

Authors:  Melissa Hodeib; Jenny Chang; Fong Liu; Argyrios Ziogas; Sarah Dilley; Leslie M Randall; Hoda Anton-Culver; Robert E Bristow
Journal:  Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2015-04-22       Impact factor: 5.482

8.  Disparities in ovarian cancer care quality and survival according to race and socioeconomic status.

Authors:  Robert E Bristow; Matthew A Powell; Noor Al-Hammadi; Ling Chen; J Philip Miller; Phillip Y Roland; David G Mutch; William A Cliby
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2013-03-28       Impact factor: 13.506

9.  Neoadjuvant chemotherapy for newly diagnosed, advanced ovarian cancer: Society of Gynecologic Oncology and American Society of Clinical Oncology Clinical Practice Guideline.

Authors:  Alexi A Wright; Kari Bohlke; Deborah K Armstrong; Michael A Bookman; William A Cliby; Robert L Coleman; Don S Dizon; Joseph J Kash; Larissa A Meyer; Kathleen N Moore; Alexander B Olawaiye; Jessica Oldham; Ritu Salani; Dee Sparacio; William P Tew; Ignace Vergote; Mitchell I Edelson
Journal:  Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2016-08-08       Impact factor: 5.482

10.  Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy for Newly Diagnosed, Advanced Ovarian Cancer: Society of Gynecologic Oncology and American Society of Clinical Oncology Clinical Practice Guideline.

Authors:  Alexi A Wright; Kari Bohlke; Deborah K Armstrong; Michael A Bookman; William A Cliby; Robert L Coleman; Don S Dizon; Joseph J Kash; Larissa A Meyer; Kathleen N Moore; Alexander B Olawaiye; Jessica Oldham; Ritu Salani; Dee Sparacio; William P Tew; Ignace Vergote; Mitchell I Edelson
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2016-08-08       Impact factor: 44.544

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.