Ovarian Cancer Debulking Surgery: A Survey of Practice in Australia and New Zealand

Author:

Brand Alison H.

Abstract

Introduction:The purpose of our study was to survey all practicing gynecological oncologists in Australia and New Zealand to determine their definition of optimal debulking, their current surgical techniques used to achieve optimal debulking, and their reasons for using or not using such techniques.Methods:In October 2007, an email survey was distributed to all 42 practicing gynecological oncologists in Australia and New Zealand. Information obtained included practice patterns, as well as surgical expertise, techniques, and rationale with respect to primary debulking surgery for advanced epithelial ovarian cancer.Results:There was an 81% response rate. Fifty-eight percent of respondents considered optimal debulking to be residual disease less than 10 mm, 21% considered it to be less than 5 mm, and 18% considered it to be no visible disease. Sixty-five percent were able to achieve optimal debulking in their patients, as measured by their own criteria. Patient factors considered to be most frequent barriers to optimal debulking were medical comorbidities (91%) and older patient population (59%). Disease findings which most often precluded optimal debulking were disease involving the base of the mesentery (94%), confluent diaphragmatic disease (74%), and large volume, confluent peritoneal disease (50%). A variety of procedures were used by either gynecological oncologists or their colleagues, but more than 50% would never perform resection of diaphragmatic disease, resection of parenchymal liver metastases, or ablation with cavitron ultrasonic surgical aspirator or argon beam. The most common reasons for not performing ultraradical procedures were concerns regarding benefit (39%), concerns regarding morbidity (24%), and lack of personal expertise (24%).Conclusions:Most gynecological oncologists use a variety of surgical techniques to achieve optimal debulking. However, patient factors as well as concerns regarding benefit and lack of expertise were reasons cited for not performing ultraradical surgery.

Publisher

BMJ

Subject

Obstetrics and Gynaecology,Oncology

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3