OBJECTIVE: To evaluate health care provider adherence to the surgical protocol endorsed by the National Comprehensive Cancer Network and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists at the time of risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy and compare adherence between gynecologic oncologists and obstetrician-gynecologists (ob-gyns). METHODS: In this multicenter retrospective cohort study, women were included if they had a pathogenic BRCA mutation and underwent risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy between 2011 and 2017. Adherence was defined as completing all of the following: collection of washings, complete resection of the fallopian tube, and performing the Sectioning and Extensively Examining the Fimbriated End (SEE-FIM) pathologic protocol. RESULTS: Of 290 patients who met inclusion criteria, 160 patients were treated by 18 gynecologic oncologists and 130 patients by 75 ob-gyns. Surgery was performed at 10 different hospitals throughout a single metropolitan area. Demographic and clinical characteristics were similar between groups. Overall, 199 cases (69%) were adherent to the surgical protocol. Gynecologic oncologists were more than twice as likely to fully adhere to the full surgical protocol as ob-gyns (91% vs 41%, P<.01). Specifically, gynecologic oncologists were more likely to resect the entire tube (99% vs 95%, P=.03), to have followed the SEE-FIM protocol (98% vs 82%, P<.01), and collect washings (94% vs 49%, P<.01). Complication rates did not differ between groups. Occult neoplasia was diagnosed in 11 patients (3.8%). The incidence of occult neoplasia was 6.3% in gynecologic oncology patients and 0.8% in obstetrics and gynecology patients (P=.03). CONCLUSION: Despite clear surgical guidelines, only two thirds of all health care providers were fully adherent to guidelines. Gynecologic oncologists were more likely to follow surgical guidelines compared with general ob-gyns and more likely to diagnose occult neoplasia despite similar patient populations. Rates of risk-reducing surgery will likely continue to increase as genetic testing becomes more widespread, highlighting the importance of health care provider education for this procedure. Centralized care or referral to subspecialists for risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy may be warranted.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate health care provider adherence to the surgical protocol endorsed by the National Comprehensive Cancer Network and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists at the time of risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy and compare adherence between gynecologic oncologists and obstetrician-gynecologists (ob-gyns). METHODS: In this multicenter retrospective cohort study, women were included if they had a pathogenic BRCA mutation and underwent risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy between 2011 and 2017. Adherence was defined as completing all of the following: collection of washings, complete resection of the fallopian tube, and performing the Sectioning and Extensively Examining the Fimbriated End (SEE-FIM) pathologic protocol. RESULTS: Of 290 patients who met inclusion criteria, 160 patients were treated by 18 gynecologic oncologists and 130 patients by 75 ob-gyns. Surgery was performed at 10 different hospitals throughout a single metropolitan area. Demographic and clinical characteristics were similar between groups. Overall, 199 cases (69%) were adherent to the surgical protocol. Gynecologic oncologists were more than twice as likely to fully adhere to the full surgical protocol as ob-gyns (91% vs 41%, P<.01). Specifically, gynecologic oncologists were more likely to resect the entire tube (99% vs 95%, P=.03), to have followed the SEE-FIM protocol (98% vs 82%, P<.01), and collect washings (94% vs 49%, P<.01). Complication rates did not differ between groups. Occult neoplasia was diagnosed in 11 patients (3.8%). The incidence of occult neoplasia was 6.3% in gynecologic oncology patients and 0.8% in obstetrics and gynecology patients (P=.03). CONCLUSION: Despite clear surgical guidelines, only two thirds of all health care providers were fully adherent to guidelines. Gynecologic oncologists were more likely to follow surgical guidelines compared with general ob-gyns and more likely to diagnose occult neoplasia despite similar patient populations. Rates of risk-reducing surgery will likely continue to increase as genetic testing becomes more widespread, highlighting the importance of health care provider education for this procedure. Centralized care or referral to subspecialists for risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy may be warranted.
Authors: Fabiola Medeiros; Michael G Muto; Yonghee Lee; Julia A Elvin; Michael J Callahan; Colleen Feltmate; Judy E Garber; Daniel W Cramer; Christopher P Crum Journal: Am J Surg Pathol Date: 2006-02 Impact factor: 6.394
Authors: Amy P M Finch; Jan Lubinski; Pål Møller; Christian F Singer; Beth Karlan; Leigha Senter; Barry Rosen; Lovise Maehle; Parviz Ghadirian; Cezary Cybulski; Tomasz Huzarski; Andrea Eisen; William D Foulkes; Charmaine Kim-Sing; Peter Ainsworth; Nadine Tung; Henry T Lynch; Susan Neuhausen; Kelly A Metcalfe; Islay Thompson; Joan Murphy; Ping Sun; Steven A Narod Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2014-02-24 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Julie D Lamb; Rochelle L Garcia; Barbara A Goff; Pamela J Paley; Elizabeth M Swisher Journal: Am J Obstet Gynecol Date: 2006-06 Impact factor: 8.661
Authors: Susan M Domchek; Tara M Friebel; Judy E Garber; Claudine Isaacs; Ellen Matloff; Rosalind Eeles; D Gareth Evans; Wendy Rubinstein; Christian F Singer; Stephen Rubin; Henry T Lynch; Mary B Daly; Jeffrey Weitzel; Patricia A Ganz; Gabriella Pichert; Olufunmilayo I Olopade; Gail Tomlinson; Nadine Tung; Joanne L Blum; Fergus Couch; Timothy R Rebbeck Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2010-02-24 Impact factor: 4.872
Authors: Timothy R Rebbeck; Henry T Lynch; Susan L Neuhausen; Steven A Narod; Laura Van't Veer; Judy E Garber; Gareth Evans; Claudine Isaacs; Mary B Daly; Ellen Matloff; Olufunmilayo I Olopade; Barbara L Weber Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2002-05-20 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Mark E Sherman; Marion Piedmonte; Phuong L Mai; Olga B Ioffe; Brigitte M Ronnett; Linda Van Le; Iouri Ivanov; Maria C Bell; Stephanie V Blank; Paul DiSilvestro; Chad A Hamilton; Krishnansu S Tewari; Katie Wakeley; Noah D Kauff; S Diane Yamada; Gustavo Rodriguez; Steven J Skates; David S Alberts; Joan L Walker; Lori Minasian; Karen Lu; Mark H Greene Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2014-09-08 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Noah D Kauff; Susan M Domchek; Tara M Friebel; Mark E Robson; Johanna Lee; Judy E Garber; Claudine Isaacs; D Gareth Evans; Henry Lynch; Rosalind A Eeles; Susan L Neuhausen; Mary B Daly; Ellen Matloff; Joanne L Blum; Paul Sabbatini; Richard R Barakat; Clifford Hudis; Larry Norton; Kenneth Offit; Timothy R Rebbeck Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2008-02-11 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Karoline B Kuchenbaecker; John L Hopper; Daniel R Barnes; Kelly-Anne Phillips; Thea M Mooij; Marie-José Roos-Blom; Sarah Jervis; Flora E van Leeuwen; Roger L Milne; Nadine Andrieu; David E Goldgar; Mary Beth Terry; Matti A Rookus; Douglas F Easton; Antonis C Antoniou; Lesley McGuffog; D Gareth Evans; Daniel Barrowdale; Debra Frost; Julian Adlard; Kai-Ren Ong; Louise Izatt; Marc Tischkowitz; Ros Eeles; Rosemarie Davidson; Shirley Hodgson; Steve Ellis; Catherine Nogues; Christine Lasset; Dominique Stoppa-Lyonnet; Jean-Pierre Fricker; Laurence Faivre; Pascaline Berthet; Maartje J Hooning; Lizet E van der Kolk; Carolien M Kets; Muriel A Adank; Esther M John; Wendy K Chung; Irene L Andrulis; Melissa Southey; Mary B Daly; Saundra S Buys; Ana Osorio; Christoph Engel; Karin Kast; Rita K Schmutzler; Trinidad Caldes; Anna Jakubowska; Jacques Simard; Michael L Friedlander; Sue-Anne McLachlan; Eva Machackova; Lenka Foretova; Yen Y Tan; Christian F Singer; Edith Olah; Anne-Marie Gerdes; Brita Arver; Håkan Olsson Journal: JAMA Date: 2017-06-20 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Joep M A Bogaerts; Miranda P Steenbeek; Majke H D van Bommel; Johan Bulten; Jeroen A W M van der Laak; Joanne A de Hullu; Michiel Simons Journal: Virchows Arch Date: 2021-12-01 Impact factor: 4.535