Lukey Alexandra, Howard A Fuchsia, Mei Alice J, Law Michael R, Huntsman David, Pearce Celeste Leigh, Meza Rafael, Hanley Gillian E
Faculty of Medicine, School of Population and Public Health, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada.
Faculty of Medicine, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada.
BMC Cancer. 2025 Jun 6;25(1):1011. doi: 10.1186/s12885-025-14384-6.
With recent evidence that opportunistic salpingectomy is effective in preventing high grade serous carcinoma, it is imperative to consider the optimal use of this procedure. In this research, we investigated the opinions of obstetrician-gynecologists (OBGYNS) about the acceptability of using salpingectomy as a stand-alone surgery for people at higher-than-average lifetime risk (but without a pathogenic variant that increases risk for ovarian cancer) known as ‘risk-reducing salpingectomy’(RRS).
We conducted semi-structured interviews with purposefully sampled practicing OBGYNs in the province of British Columbia, Canada. We used qualitative interpretive description with inductive thematic analysis for data analysis. Our work was informed by the theoretical framework of acceptability.
The nineteen participants included physicians from both general obstetrics and gynecology practices, as well as subspecialties. OBGYNs generally found RRS to be acceptable, though this acceptability was conditional on clinical, patient, and system-level factors. Five major themes suggest that: (1) There are risks and benefits of RRS, that if balanced might support acceptability; (2) It is important to define and identify the correct patient for RRS; (3) OBGYNs value patient autonomy in the decision to undergo RRS; (4) Reproductive justice and equity are intertwined and influenced by the history of forced and coerced sterilization; and (5) Formal guidance and the right environment are enablers of RRS.
This work provides initial evidence that, from the OBGYN perspective, RRS is acceptable in the right patient population, with considerations from those practicing on the front lines of ovarian cancer prevention.
The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12885-025-14384-6.
随着近期有证据表明，机会性输卵管切除术在预防高级别浆液性癌方面有效，因此必须考虑该手术的最佳应用方式。在本研究中，我们调查了妇产科医生对于将输卵管切除术作为一种独立手术应用于终生风险高于平均水平（但无增加卵巢癌风险的致病变异）人群（即“降低风险的输卵管切除术”，RRS）的可接受性的看法。
我们对加拿大不列颠哥伦比亚省有目的地抽样选取的执业妇产科医生进行了半结构化访谈。我们采用定性解释性描述和归纳主题分析进行数据分析。我们的研究工作以可接受性的理论框架为依据。
19名参与者包括普通妇产科以及各亚专业的医生。妇产科医生总体上认为RRS是可接受的，不过这种可接受性取决于临床、患者和系统层面的因素。五个主要主题表明：（1）RRS存在风险和益处，若两者平衡可能支持其可接受性；（2）明确并识别适合RRS的正确患者很重要；（3）妇产科医生重视患者在决定接受RRS时的自主权；（4）生殖正义和平等相互交织，并受到强制绝育历史的影响；（5）正式指导和合适的环境是RRS的促成因素。
这项工作提供了初步证据，从妇产科医生的角度来看，在合适的患者群体中，RRS是可接受的，这是基于那些在卵巢癌预防一线工作的人员的考虑得出的结论。
在线版本包含可在10.1186/s12885-025-14384-6获取的补充材料。
