Soo Jin Park1, Jihyang Kim2, Sung Nyun Kim3, Eun Ji Lee1, Soohyun Oh1, Aeran Seol1, Nara Lee1, Suk Joon Chang4, Hee Seung Kim1. 1. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea. 2. Department of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul, Republic of Korea. 3. Department of Psychiatry, Seoul Medical Center, Seoul, Republic of Korea. 4. Gynecologic Cancer Center, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Ajou University School of Medicine, Suwon, Republic of Korea.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: We investigated the practice patterns of surgery for advanced ovarian cancer (AOC) through relevant international surveys. METHODS: After searching for 878 studies on surgery for AOC till 2017, we extracted 18 questions with similar query and answer formats from eight studies. Among them, 5 and 13 were classified as comprehensive and procedure information. RESULTS: In comprehensive information, there was a higher preference for optimal cytoreduction defined as no visible tumor (44%) compared with residual tumors <1 cm (38%) or <2 cm (2%) and omental disease involving the spleen or pancreas was more important as an intraoperative finding precluding optimal cytoreduction (35%) since 2010. The preference for neoadjuvant chemotherapy was the highest at its use for 1-10% (36%), which was preferred in Europe over USA. The positive expectation of preoperative determination of optimal cytoreduction was higher in Europe than in USA (44 vs. 27%; P < 0.05). In procedure information, conventional gynecological surgery was mainly performed by gynecological oncologists, whereas more than 50% of upper abdominal or urological surgeries were conducted by other surgeons. European clinicians showed a higher response rate of diaphragmatic stripping and resection than those from USA (88 vs. 60%; 69 vs. 24%; P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: No visible tumor as the criterion for optimal cytoreduction was preferred in AOC, and aggressive surgery beyond conventional gynecological surgery tended to be performed by other surgeons. Moreover, the preference of neoadjuvant chemotherapy and the positive expectation of preoperative determination of optimal cytoreduction were higher in Europe than in USA.
BACKGROUND: We investigated the practice patterns of surgery for advanced ovarian cancer (AOC) through relevant international surveys. METHODS: After searching for 878 studies on surgery for AOC till 2017, we extracted 18 questions with similar query and answer formats from eight studies. Among them, 5 and 13 were classified as comprehensive and procedure information. RESULTS: In comprehensive information, there was a higher preference for optimal cytoreduction defined as no visible tumor (44%) compared with residual tumors <1 cm (38%) or <2 cm (2%) and omental disease involving the spleen or pancreas was more important as an intraoperative finding precluding optimal cytoreduction (35%) since 2010. The preference for neoadjuvant chemotherapy was the highest at its use for 1-10% (36%), which was preferred in Europe over USA. The positive expectation of preoperative determination of optimal cytoreduction was higher in Europe than in USA (44 vs. 27%; P < 0.05). In procedure information, conventional gynecological surgery was mainly performed by gynecological oncologists, whereas more than 50% of upper abdominal or urological surgeries were conducted by other surgeons. European clinicians showed a higher response rate of diaphragmatic stripping and resection than those from USA (88 vs. 60%; 69 vs. 24%; P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: No visible tumor as the criterion for optimal cytoreduction was preferred in AOC, and aggressive surgery beyond conventional gynecological surgery tended to be performed by other surgeons. Moreover, the preference of neoadjuvant chemotherapy and the positive expectation of preoperative determination of optimal cytoreduction were higher in Europe than in USA.
Authors: Antoni Llueca; Anna Serra; Maria Teresa Climent; Blanca Segarra; Yasmine Maazouzi; Marta Soriano; Javier Escrig Journal: World J Surg Oncol Date: 2020-11-25 Impact factor: 2.754
Authors: Suk Joon Chang; Christina Fotopoulou; Robert E Bristow; Dennis S Chi; William A Cliby Journal: J Gynecol Oncol Date: 2021-05 Impact factor: 4.401
Authors: Soo Jin Park; Eun Ji Lee; Aeran Seol; Sunwoo Park; Jiyeon Ham; Ga Won Yim; Seung-Hyuk Shim; Whasun Lim; Suk-Joon Chang; Gwonhwa Song; Ji Won Park; Hee Seung Kim Journal: J Gynecol Oncol Date: 2022-05-24 Impact factor: 4.756
Authors: Charles H Norell; John Butler; Rhonda Farrell; Alon Altman; James Bentley; Citadel J Cabasag; Paul A Cohen; Scott Fegan; Michael Fung-Kee-Fung; Charlie Gourley; Neville F Hacker; Louise Hanna; Claus Kim Høgdall; Gunnar Kristensen; Janice Kwon; Orla McNally; Gregg Nelson; Andy Nordin; Dearbhaile O'Donnell; Tine Schnack; Peter H Sykes; Ewa Zotow; Samantha Harrison Journal: Int J Gynecol Cancer Date: 2020-08-11 Impact factor: 3.437