Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, New York University School of Medicine, 462 1st Avenue, Rm 9 E2, New York, NY, 10016, USA.
World J Surg Oncol. 2017 Dec 11;15(1):218. doi: 10.1186/s12957-017-1282-5.
Risk-reducing bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy (RRBSO) increases survival in patients at high risk of developing ovarian cancer. While many general gynecologists perform this procedure, some argue it should be performed exclusively by specialists. In this retrospective observational study, we identified how often optimal techniques were used and whether surgeons' training impacted implementation.
We used the ACOG guidelines highlighting various aspects of the procedure to determine which elements were consistent with best practices to maximize surgical prophylaxis. All cases of RRBSO from 2006 to 2010 were identified. We abstracted data from the operative and pathology reports to review the techniques employed. Fisher's exact test and chi-square were utilized to compare differences between groups (InStat, La Jolla, CA).
Among 263 RRBSOs, 22 were performed by general gynecologists and 241 by gynecologic oncologists. Gynecologic oncologists were more likely to perform pelvic washings-217/241 vs. 10/22 (p < .0001). They were more likely to include a description of the upper abdomen-220/241 vs. 12/22 (p < .0001). Oncologists were more likely to utilize a retroperitoneal approach to skeletonize the infundibulopelvic ligaments-157/241 vs. 3/22 (p < .0001). When operations were performed by oncologists, the specimens were more often completely sectioned-217/241 vs. 16/22 (p = .003). The use of a retroperitoneal approach among gynecologic oncologists increased over the study period (chi-square for trend, p < .0001). There was no visible trend in performance improvement in any other area when looking at either group.
Gynecologic oncologists are more likely to adhere to best practice techniques when performing RRBSO, though there was room for improvement for both groups.
降低风险的双侧输卵管卵巢切除术(RRBSO)可提高高危卵巢癌患者的生存率。虽然许多普通妇科医生都能进行这项手术,但也有人认为它应该由专家来进行。在这项回顾性观察研究中,我们确定了最佳技术的使用频率,以及外科医生的培训是否会影响技术的实施。
我们使用 ACOG 指南来确定哪些因素与最佳实践一致,以最大限度地提高手术预防效果,从而确定该程序的各个方面。确定了 2006 年至 2010 年所有 RRBSO 病例。我们从手术和病理报告中提取数据,以审查所采用的技术。Fisher 精确检验和卡方检验用于比较组间差异(InStat,La Jolla,CA)。
在 263 例 RRBSO 中,22 例由普通妇科医生完成,241 例由妇科肿瘤医生完成。妇科肿瘤医生更有可能进行盆腔冲洗-217/241 与 10/22(p < 0.0001)。他们更有可能描述上腹部-220/241 与 12/22(p < 0.0001)。肿瘤学家更有可能采用腹膜后方法来骨骼化输卵管卵巢韧带-157/241 与 3/22(p < 0.0001)。当由肿瘤医生进行手术时,标本更经常完全切片-217/241 与 16/22(p = 0.003)。在研究期间,妇科肿瘤医生中使用腹膜后方法的比例增加(趋势卡方检验,p < 0.0001)。当分别观察两组时,在任何其他领域都没有看到性能改善的明显趋势。
妇科肿瘤医生在进行 RRBSO 时更有可能遵循最佳实践技术,尽管两组都有改进的空间。