Documentation of critical intraoperative oncologic findings: Synoptic versus narrative operative reports for childhood cancer surgery

Abstract

AbstractBackgroundDocumentation of intraoperative oncologic findings varies greatly across narrative operative reports (NRs). An international panel of childhood cancer experts recently developed a synoptic operative report (SR) for childhood cancer surgeries. The aim of this study was to compare the documentation of critical intraoperative findings in NRs versus SRs.MethodsA single‐center retrospective review of all surgical resections of primary solid tumors at our pediatric oncology center was conducted from June 2023 to March 2024, after an institutional SR was piloted from October 2023 onwards. Data collected included the presence or absence of six components included in standard pediatric oncology NRs. Inclusion rates were calculated as percentages for each component. Due to the small sample, the Fisher's exact test was used for all hypothesis testing.ResultsSeventy primary tumor resections were performed during the study period, as documented by 38 NRs and 32 SRs. All operative reports after October 2023 were SRs. Completeness of tumor resection and specimen naming were consistently documented in NRs (86% and 100%, respectively) and SRs (100% and 100%, respectively). The presence/absence of three components—intraoperative tumor spillage (31%), vascular involvement (31%), and lymph node sampling (26%)—were documented in fewer than a third of the NRs. Documentation of the presence/absence of locoregional spread, intraoperative tumor spillage, vascular involvement, and lymph node sampling was significantly better in SRs than in NRs.ConclusionAdoption of SRs significantly improved the documentation of critical intraoperative findings. Thus, we recommend using SRs in pediatric solid tumor surgery.