Is minimally invasive surgical approach a reasonable option in apparent early stage epithelial ovarian cancer restaging? Results from a multicentric retrospective study.

INTRODUCTION: To perform surgical staging of early stage ovarian cancer (EOC), conventional laparoscopy (LS) and robot-assisted laparoscopy (RLS) appear to be reliable procedures compared to open surgery. But oncologicals results with long-term follow up are limited in the literature. The objective of this study is to evaluate the surgical and long-term survival for patients managed by minimally invasive surgery (MIS). MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a multicentric retrospective study in 6 institutions. All patients referred for epithelial EOC (apparent stage I-IIa) managed with LS and RLS were involved. RESULTS: From December 2008 to December 2017, 140 patients were included (109 in LS group and 31 in RLS group). A total of 27 (19.2 %) patients were upstaged to an advanced ovarian cancer (FIGO stage > IIA), and 73 % of patients received chemotherapy. Mean operative time was 265,8 ± 88,4 min and significantly longer in RLS group (LS = 254,5 ± 86,8; RLS = 305,6 ± 85,5; p = 0,008). Rate of severe post-operative complications (grade 3) was 5,7 %. Thirteen conversion to laparotomy occurred, including one per-operative hemorrhaege. After a mean follow-up of 60,7 months, 29 (20.7 %) patients recurred, with a time to recurrence was >24 months in 51,7 % of cases. Overall survival (OS) was 88.6 % and disease-free survival (DFS) was 79.3 %. Oncologic outcomes were similar between LS and RLS group (OS: p = 0,504 and DFS: p = 0,213). CONCLUSION: Surgical staging of EOC by LS or RLS approach has long-term equivalent surgical and oncological approach. These results seem to be equivalent to open surgery according to literature review.

A computer synoptic operative report versus a report dictated by a surgeon in advanced ovarian cancer.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the role of a computer synoptic operative report in enhancing the quality and completeness of surgical reporting for advanced ovarian cancer surgeries. METHODS: The study was conducted at a tertiary cancer center between January 2016 and September 2021, and the computer synoptic operative report was implemented in May 2019. The study compared two cohorts: the first consisted of the 'before computer synoptic operative report (P1)' period, during which the operative reports were dictated freely by the surgeons, and the second consisted of the 'after computer synoptic operative report (P2)' period, during which all surgeons used the computer synoptic operative report. RESULTS: The study analyzed 227 operative reports, with 104 during period 1 (P1) and 123 during period 2 (P2). In the P1 group, more than half of the patients (54 out of 104, 52%) underwent interval surgery after completing six cycles of chemotherapy; In contrast, in the P2 group, all interval debulking surgeries were performed after fewer than six chemotherapy cycles (p<0.001). Although interval debulking surgery after fewer than six chemotherapy cycles was more frequent in P2, the rate of primary debulking surgery was similar between the groups. The median intra-operative peritoneal carcinomatosis index was higher in P2 (2 in P1 vs 4 in P2, p<0.001), and mean blood loss was higher in P1 (308 mL vs 151 mL, p<0.001). The rate of complete cytoreduction was similar between P1 and P2 (97% vs 87%, respectively, p=0.6). The median length of hospital stay was 12 days in the P1 group and 16 days in the P2 group (p=0.5). Compliance with all eight significant items was higher in the P2 group, with all items present in 66% of the operative reports in the P2 group compared with none of the reports in the P1 group. Compliance for the following items was: International Federation of Obstetrics and Gynecology stage (24% vs 100%), histology (76% vs 97%), CA125 (63% vs 89%), type of surgery (38% vs 100%), peritoneal carcinomatosis index (21% vs 100%), complete cytoreduction score 36% vs 99%), Aletti score (0% vs 89%), and blood loss (32% vs 98%) for P1 and P2; respectively. CONCLUSION: The use of the computer synoptic operative report improved the completeness and quality of the surgical information documented in advanced ovarian cancer surgeries.