Literature DB >> 33154095

Correlation of surgeon radiology assessment with laparoscopic disease site scoring in patients with advanced ovarian cancer.

Nicole D Fleming1, Shannon N Westin2, Larissa A Meyer2, Aaron Shafer2, Jose Alejandro Rauh-Hain2, Michaela Onstad2, Lauren Cobb2, Michael Bevers2, Bryan M Fellman3, Jennifer Burzawa4, Priya Bhosale5, Behrouz Zand2, Amir Jazaeri2, Charles Levenback2, Robert L Coleman2, Pamela T Soliman2, Anil K Sood2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Radiographic triage measures in patients with new advanced ovarian cancer have yielded inconsistent results.
OBJECTIVE: To determine the correlation between surgeon radiology assessment and laparoscopic scoring by disease sites in patients with newly diagnosed advanced stage ovarian cancer.
METHODS: Fourteen gynecologic oncology surgeons from a single institution performed a blinded review of pre-operative contrast-enhanced CT imaging from patients with advanced stage ovarian cancer. Each of the patients had also undergone laparoscopic scoring assessment, between April 2013 and December 2017, to determine primary resectability using the validated Fagotti scoring method, and assigned a predictive index value score. Surgeons were asked to provide expected predictive index value scores based on their blinded review of the antecedent CT imaging. Linear mixed models were conducted to calculate the correlation between radiologic and laparoscopic score for surgeons individually, and as a group. Once the model was fit, the inter-class correlation and 95% CI were calculated.
RESULTS: Radiology review was performed on 20 patients with advanced stage ovarian cancer who underwent laparoscopic scoring assessment. Surgeon faculty rank included assistant professor (n=5), associate professor (p=4), and professor (n=5). The kappa inter-rater agreement was -0.017 (95% CI -0.023 to -0.005), indicating low inter-rater agreement between radiology review and actual laparoscopic score. The inter-class correlation in this model was 0.06 (0.02-0.21), indicating that surgeons do not score the same across all the images. When using a clinical cut-off point for the predictive index value of 8, the probability of agreement between radiology and actual laparoscopic score was 0.56 (95% CI 0.49 to 0.73). Examination of disease site sub-scales showed that the probability of agreement was as follows: peritoneum 0.57 (95% CI 0.51 to 0.62), diaphragm 0.54 (95% CI 0.48 to 0.60), mesentery 0.51 (95% CI 0.45 to 0.57), omentum 0.61 (95% CI 0.55 to 0.67), bowel 0.54 (95% CI 0.44 to 0.64), stomach 0.71 (95% CI 0.65 to 0.76), and liver 0.36 (95% CI 0.31 to 0.42). The number of laparoscopic scoring cases, tumor reductive surgery cases, or faculty rank was not significantly associated with overall or sub-scale agreement.
CONCLUSIONS: Surgeon radiology review did not correlate highly with actual laparoscopic scoring assessment findings in patients with advanced stage ovarian cancer. Our study highlights the limited accuracy of surgeon radiographic assessment to determine resectability. © IGCS and ESGO 2021. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.

Entities:  

Keywords:  cytoreduction surgical procedures; laparoscopes; ovarian cancer

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 33154095      PMCID: PMC8266398          DOI: 10.1136/ijgc-2020-001718

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Gynecol Cancer        ISSN: 1048-891X            Impact factor:   3.437


  24 in total

1.  Research electronic data capture (REDCap)--a metadata-driven methodology and workflow process for providing translational research informatics support.

Authors:  Paul A Harris; Robert Taylor; Robert Thielke; Jonathon Payne; Nathaniel Gonzalez; Jose G Conde
Journal:  J Biomed Inform       Date:  2008-09-30       Impact factor: 6.317

2.  Laparoscopic Surgical Algorithm to Triage the Timing of Tumor Reductive Surgery in Advanced Ovarian Cancer.

Authors:  Nicole D Fleming; Alpa M Nick; Robert L Coleman; Shannon N Westin; Pedro T Ramirez; Pamela T Soliman; Bryan Fellman; Larissa A Meyer; Kathleen M Schmeler; Karen H Lu; Anil K Sood
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2018-09       Impact factor: 7.661

3.  Peritoneal carcinomatosis in primary ovarian cancer staging: comparison between MDCT, MRI, and 18F-FDG PET/CT.

Authors:  Sabine Schmidt; Reto Antoine Meuli; Chahin Achtari; John Olivier Prior
Journal:  Clin Nucl Med       Date:  2015-05       Impact factor: 7.794

4.  Accuracy of MDCT in the preoperative definition of Peritoneal Cancer Index (PCI) in patients with advanced ovarian cancer who underwent peritonectomy and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC).

Authors:  Maria Antonietta Mazzei; Leila Khader; Alfredo Cirigliano; Nevada Cioffi Squitieri; Susanna Guerrini; Beatrice Forzoni; Daniele Marrelli; Franco Roviello; Francesco Giuseppe Mazzei; Luca Volterrani
Journal:  Abdom Imaging       Date:  2013-12

5.  Multi-institutional reciprocal validation study of computed tomography predictors of suboptimal primary cytoreduction in patients with advanced ovarian cancer.

Authors:  Allison E Axtell; Margaret H Lee; Robert E Bristow; Sean C Dowdy; William A Cliby; Steven Raman; John P Weaver; Mojan Gabbay; Michael Ngo; Scott Lentz; Ilana Cass; Andrew J Li; Beth Y Karlan; Christine H Holschneider
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2007-02-01       Impact factor: 44.544

6.  Laparoscopy to Predict the Result of Primary Cytoreductive Surgery in Patients With Advanced Ovarian Cancer: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

Authors:  Marianne J Rutten; Hannah S van Meurs; Roelien van de Vrie; Katja N Gaarenstroom; Christiana A Naaktgeboren; Toon van Gorp; Henk G Ter Brugge; Ward Hofhuis; Henk W R Schreuder; Henriette J G Arts; Petra L M Zusterzeel; Johanna M A Pijnenborg; Maarten van Haaften; Guus Fons; Mirjam J A Engelen; Erik A Boss; M Caroline Vos; Kees G Gerestein; Eltjo M J Schutter; Brent C Opmeer; Anje M Spijkerboer; Patrick M M Bossuyt; Ben Willem Mol; Gemma G Kenter; Marrije R Buist
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2016-12-28       Impact factor: 44.544

7.  External validation of a laparoscopic-based score to evaluate resectability of advanced ovarian cancers: clues for a simplified score.

Authors:  Jean-Luc Brun; Roman Rouzier; Serge Uzan; Emile Daraï
Journal:  Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2008-06-24       Impact factor: 5.482

8.  Introduction of staging laparoscopy in the management of advanced epithelial ovarian, tubal and peritoneal cancer: impact on prognosis in a single institution experience.

Authors:  A Fagotti; G Vizzielli; F Fanfani; B Costantini; G Ferrandina; V Gallotta; S Gueli Alletti; L Tortorella; G Scambia
Journal:  Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2013-08-09       Impact factor: 5.482

9.  Concordance of a laparoscopic scoring algorithm with primary surgery findings in advanced stage ovarian cancer.

Authors:  Jean M Hansen; Anil K Sood; Robert L Coleman; Shannon N Westin; Pamela T Soliman; Pedro T Ramirez; Bryan M Fellman; Kathleen M Schmeler; Nicole D Fleming
Journal:  Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2018-10-23       Impact factor: 5.482

10.  Accuracy of radiologic- laparoscopic peritoneal carcinomatosis categorization in the prediction of surgical outcome.

Authors:  Shimaa Abdalla Ahmed; Hisham Abou-Taleb; Noha Ali; Dalia M Badary
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2019-05-24       Impact factor: 3.039

View more
  1 in total

1.  Small extracellular vesicles from malignant ascites of patients with advanced ovarian cancer provide insights into the dynamics of the extracellular matrix.

Authors:  Barbara Bortot; Maura Apollonio; Enrico Rampazzo; Francesco Valle; Marco Brucale; Andrea Ridolfi; Blendi Ura; Riccardo Addobbati; Giovanni Di Lorenzo; Federico Romano; Francesca Buonomo; Chiara Ripepi; Giuseppe Ricci; Stefania Biffi
Journal:  Mol Oncol       Date:  2021-10-27       Impact factor: 6.603

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.