Longitudinal perioperative patient-reported outcomes in open compared with minimally invasive hysterectomy.

BACKGROUND: There are few prospective studies in the gynecologic surgical literature that compared patient-reported outcomes between open and minimally invasive hysterectomies within enhanced recovery after surgery pathways. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to compare prospectively collected perioperative patient-reported symptom burden and interference measures in open compared with minimally invasive hysterectomy cohorts within enhanced recovery after surgery pathways. STUDY DESIGN: We compared patient-reported symptom burden and functional interference in 646 patients who underwent a hysterectomy (254 underwent open surgery and 392 underwent minimally invasive surgery) for benign and malignant indications under enhanced recovery after surgery protocols. Outcomes were prospectively measured using the validated MD Anderson Symptom Inventory, which was administered perioperatively up to 8 weeks after surgery. Cohorts were compared using Fisher exact and chi-squared tests, adjusted longitudinal generalized linear mixed modeling, and Kaplan Meier curves to model return to no or mild symptoms. RESULTS: The open cohort had significantly worse preoperative physical functional interference (P=.001). At the time of hospital discharge postoperatively, the open cohort reported significantly higher mean symptom severity scores and more moderate or severe scores for overall (P<.001) and abdominal pain (P<.001), fatigue (P=.001), lack of appetite (P<.001), bloating (P=.041), and constipation (P<.001) when compared with the minimally invasive cohort. The open cohort also had significantly higher interference in physical functioning (score 5.0 vs 2.7; P<.001) than the minimally invasive cohort at the time of discharge with no differences in affective interference between the 2 groups. In mixed modeling analysis of the first 7 postoperative days, both cohorts reported improved symptom burden and functional interference over time with generally slower recovery in the open cohort. From 1 to 8 postoperative weeks, the open cohort had worse mean scores for all evaluated symptoms and interference measures except for pain with urination, although scores indicated mild symptomatic burden and interference in both cohorts. The time to return to no or mild symptoms was significantly longer in the open cohort for overall pain (14 vs 4 days; P<.001), fatigue (8 vs 4 days; P<.001), disturbed sleep (2 vs 2 days; P<.001), and appetite (1.5 vs 1 days; P<.001) but was significantly longer in the minimally invasive cohort for abdominal pain (42 vs 28 days; P<.001) and bloating (42 vs 8 days; P<.001). The median time to return to no or mild functional interference was longer in the open than in the minimally invasive hysterectomy cohort for physical functioning (36 vs 32 days; P<.001) with no difference in compositive affective functioning (5 vs 5 days; P=.07) between the groups. CONCLUSION: Open hysterectomy was associated with increased symptom burden in the immediate postoperative period and longer time to return to no or mild symptom burden and interference with physical functioning. However, all patient-reported measures improved within days to weeks of both open and minimally invasive surgery and differences were not always clinically significant.

Juvenile granulosa cell tumor in a transgender male with Ollier disease: A case report.

•Multiple case reports are published on patients with Ollier's disease presenting simultaneously with granulosa cell tumors.•More medical conditions are being treated with androgens and estrogens, including gender dysphoria.•Caution should be given to transgender patients on active hormonal therapy.•Providers should consider prescreening for hormonally responsive medical conditions.

Medicaid Expansion and Postoperative Mortality in Women with Gynecologic Cancer: A Difference-in-Difference Analysis.

BACKGROUND: The association between Medicaid expansion and postoperative mortality after surgery for gynecologic cancer is unknown. Our objective was to compare 30- and 90-day postoperative mortality after gynecologic cancer surgery before and after 2014 in states that did and did not expand Medicaid. METHODS: We searched the National Cancer Database for women aged 40-64 years old between 2010 and 2016 who underwent surgery for a primary gynecologic malignancy. We used pre/post and quasi-experimental difference-in-difference (DID) multivariable logistic regressions to evaluate mortality pre-2014 (2010-2013) and post-2014 (2014-2016) for states that did and did not expand Medicaid in January 2014. We completed univariable logistic regressions for covariates of interest. RESULTS: Among 169,731 women, 30-day postoperative mortality in expansion states after 2014 significantly decreased for endometrial cancer (odds ratio [OR] 0.42, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.26-0.67) and ovarian cancer (OR 0.67, 95% CI 0.46-0.99) and increased for cervical cancer (OR 3.82, 95% CI 1.12-13.01). Compared with non-expansion states, expansion states had improved 30-day postoperative mortality for endometrial cancer after 2014 (DID OR 0.54, 95% CI 0.31-0.96). Univariable analysis demonstrated improved 30-day postoperative mortality for Black women with endometrial cancer in expansion states (DID OR 0.22, 95% CI 0.05-0.95). There was improved 90-day postoperative mortality for endometrial cancer in expansion states (OR 0.66, 95% CI 0.50-0.85), and improved 90-day postoperative mortality for Midwestern women with ovarian cancer in expansion states on univariable analysis (DID OR 0.48, 95% CI 0.26-0.91). CONCLUSIONS: State Medicaid legislation was associated with improved postoperative survival in women with endometrial cancer and subgroups of women with endometrial and ovarian cancer.

Temporal Patterns and Adoption of Germline and Somatic BRCA Testing in Ovarian Cancer.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the testing rate, patient characteristics, temporal trends, timing, and results of germline and somatic BRCA testing in patients with ovarian cancer using real-world data. METHODS: We included a cross-sectional subset of adult patients diagnosed with ovarian cancer between January 1, 2011, and November 30, 2018, who received frontline treatment and were followed for at least 1 year in a real-world database. The primary outcome was receipt of BRCA testing, classified by biosample source as germline (blood or saliva) or somatic (tissue). Lines of therapy (frontline, second line, third line) were derived based on dates of surgery and chemotherapy. Descriptive statistics were analyzed. RESULTS: Among 2,557 patients, 72.2% (n=1,846) had at least one documented BRCA test. Among tested patients, 62.5% (n=1,154) had only germline testing, 10.6% (n=197) had only somatic testing, and 19.9% (n=368) had both. Most patients had testing before (9.7%, n=276) or during (48.6%, n=1,521) frontline therapy, with 17.6% (n=273) tested during second-line and 12.7% (n=129) tested during third-line therapy. Patients who received BRCA testing, compared with patients without testing, were younger (mean age 63 years vs 66 years, P <.001) and were more likely to be treated at an academic practice (10.4% vs 7.0%, P =.01), with differences by Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance score ( P <.001), stage of disease ( P <.001), histology ( P <.001), geography ( P <.001), and type of frontline therapy ( P <.001), but no differences based on race or ethnicity. The proportion of patients who received BRCA testing within 1 year of diagnosis increased from 24.6% of patients in 2011 to 75.6% of patients in 2018. CONCLUSION: In a large cohort of patients with ovarian cancer, significant practice disparities existed in testing for actionable BRCA mutations. Despite increased testing over time, many patients did not receive testing, suggesting missed opportunities to identify patients appropriate for targeted therapy and genetic counseling.

Association between time to diagnosis, time to treatment, and ovarian cancer survival in the United States.

OBJECTIVE: Evaluate the association between time to diagnosis and treatment of advanced ovarian cancer with overall and ovarian cancer specific mortality using a retrospective cross sectional study of a population based cancer registry database. METHODS: The Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare database was searched from 1992 to 2015 for women aged ≥66 years with epithelial ovarian cancer and abdominal/pelvic pain, bloating, difficulty eating, or urinary symptoms within 1 year of cancer diagnosis. Time from presentation to diagnosis and treatment were evaluated as outcomes and covariables. Cox regression models and adjusted Kaplan-Meier curves evaluated 5 year overall and cancer-specific survival. RESULTS: Among 13 872 women, better survival was associated with longer time from presentation to diagnosis (overall survival hazard ratio (HR) 0.95, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.94 to 0.95; cancer specific survival HR 0.95, 95% CI 0.94 to 0.96) and diagnosis to treatment (overall survival HR 0.94, 95% CI 0.92 to 0.96; cancer specific survival HR 0.93, 95% CI 0.91 to 0.96). There was longer time from presentation to diagnosis in Hispanic women (relative risk (RR) 1.21, 95% CI 1.12 to 1.32) and from diagnosis to treatment in non-Hispanic black women (RR 1.36, 95% CI 1.21 to 1.54), with lower likelihood of survival at 5 years after adjustment for time to diagnosis and treatment among non-Hispanic black women (HR 1.15, 95% CI 1.05 to 1.26) compared with non-Hispanic white women. Gynecologic oncology visit was associated with improved overall (p<0.001) and cancer specific (p<0.001) survival despite a longer time from presentation to treatment (p<0.001). CONCLUSION: Longer time to diagnosis and treatment were associated with improved survival, suggesting that tumor specific features are more important prognostic factors than the time interval of workup and treatment. Significant sociodemographic disparities indicate social determinants of health influencing workup and care. Gynecologic oncologist visits were associated with improved survival, highlighting the importance of appropriate referral for suspected ovarian cancer.

Gynecologic oncology patient perspectives and knowledge on advance care planning: A quality improvement intervention.

Objectives: Assess and improve advance care planning (ACP) awareness and uptake among gynecologic oncology patients. Methods: Using a quality improvement Plan-Do-Check-Act framework, we completed a single institution needs assessment and intervention. The needs assessment was a 26-question survey assessing baseline ACP knowledge and preferences of gynecologic oncology patients. We used this survey to implement an outpatient intervention in which patients were offered ACP resources (pamphlet, discussion with their gynecologic oncologist, and/or social work referral). We conducted a post-intervention survey among patients who had and had not received ACP resource(s) to assess whether our intervention increased ACP knowledge, discussions, or uptake. Results: Among 106 patients surveyed in the needs assessment, 33 % had ACP documents, 26 % had discussed ACP with a physician, and 82 % thought discussing ACP was important. The majority preferred these conversations in the outpatient setting (52 %) with their gynecologic oncologist (80 %) instead of nurses or trainees. In the intervention, 526 patients were offered ACP resources. Compared to women who did not receive resources (n = 324), patients who received ACP resource(s) (n = 202) were more likely to have ACP discussions with their gynecologic oncologist (38 % vs 68 %, P = 0.001) and had greater proficiency regarding how to create ACP documents (median score 5/10 vs 8/10, P = 0.048), although they were no more likely to have ACP documented in their electronic medical record (27 % vs 9 %, p = 0.08). Conclusions: ACP uptake among gynecologic oncology patients is low, but ACP discussions with an oncologist during outpatient visits are important to patients and improve their knowledge regarding completing ACP documents.

A prospective cross-sectional survey comparing patient and provider expectations regarding ovarian cancer prognosis.

Introduction: There is limited data comparing patient and physician expectations regarding ovarian cancer prognosis. Our primary objective was to compare physician and patient estimates of survival to 6 months, 1 year, and 5 years; secondary objectives included comparing provider and patient responses on the likelihood of requiring future treatments and categorizing patient and provider preferences regarding communication about prognosis. Methods: A prospective cross-sectional survey was delivered to 10 gynecologic oncology providers and 50 adult ovarian cancer patients from November 2015-April 2016 at one institution. Descriptive statistics were used to categorize survey answers and compare survey answers between patients and providers; multivariable logistic regression evaluated patient survey responses. Results: All providers (100%) believed treating providers should discuss prognosis and 90% reported having prognostic conversations with patients, compared to 63%, 37%, and 4% of patients who reported discussing prognosis, living wills/advance directives, and palliative care/hospice services, respectively, with their provider. Compared to their provider, patients gave significantly lower estimations of requiring any future therapy (mean score 84.6 vs 74, p <.001) and future chemotherapy (mean score 84.1 vs 69.8, p <.001) and significantly higher estimations of requiring future surgery (mean score 23.3 vs 40, p <.001), achieving remission (mean score 33.5 vs 47.5, p =.009), survival to 1 year (mean score 77.1 vs 86.4, p =.002), and survival to 5 years (mean score 40.5 vs 61.3, p <.001). Conclusions: Although gynecologic oncology providers believe it is important to discuss prognosis and end-of-life care, there are gaps in communication, knowledge, and expectations between providers and ovarian cancer patients.

Impacts of Medicaid Expansion on Stage at Cancer Diagnosis by Patient Insurance Type.

INTRODUCTION: The expansion of Medicaid under the Affordable Care Act increased access to health care for millions of low-income Americans. However, the longer-term impacts of the policy on cancer outcomes remain unknown. This study examined the impact of Medicaid expansion on early- and late-stage diagnosis for 4 common cancers (breast, cervical, colorectal, and lung) using 4 full years of postpolicy data. METHODS: Patients aged 40-64 years diagnosed with breast, cervical, colorectal, or lung cancer from 2010 to 2017 were identified using the National Cancer Database. Difference-in-difference analyses compared changes in early-stage and late-stage diagnoses among expansion states with those among nonexpansion states. Subgroup analyses explored potential effect modification by insurance type. Data analysis was performed from June to October 2021. RESULTS: The proportion of early stage diagnosis of breast (difference in difference=1.58, 95% CI=0.89, 2.27), cervical (difference in difference=3.20; 95% CI=0.44, 5.95), colorectal (difference in difference=1.98; 95% CI=1.18, 2.78), and lung (difference in difference=1.74; 95% CI=0.98, 2.50) cancers increased more in expansion states than in nonexpansion states, whereas late-stage diagnosis of colorectal (difference in difference= -2.12; 95% CI= -2.98, -1.27) and lung (difference in difference= -1.87; 95% CI= -2.89, -0.84) cancers decreased more in expansion states following implementation of the Affordable Care Act. In subgroup analyses, difference-in-difference estimates for all sites and stages (except late-stage cervical cancer) were significant and larger in magnitude among Medicaid-insured than among privately insured patients. CONCLUSIONS: Study results highlight the positive impacts of Medicaid expansion on earlier diagnosis of several cancers for which screening and early detection exist, and subgroup analyses revealed greater positive effects among Medicaid-insured patients most targeted by the policy.

Medicaid expansion and 2-year survival in women with gynecologic cancer: a difference-in-difference analysis.

BACKGROUND: The Affordable Care Act implemented optional Medicaid expansion starting in 2014, but the association between Medicaid expansion and gynecologic cancer survival is unknown. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the impact of Medicaid expansion by comparing 2-year survival among gynecologic cancers before and after 2014 in states that did and did not expand Medicaid using a difference-in-difference analysis. STUDY DESIGN: We searched the National Cancer Database for women aged 40 to 64 years, diagnosed with a primary gynecologic malignancy (endometrial, ovarian, cervical, vulvar, and vaginal) between 2010 and 2016. We used a quasiexperimental difference-in-difference multivariable Cox regression analysis to compare 2-year survival between states that expanded Medicaid in January 2014 and states that did not expand Medicaid as of 2016. We performed univariable subgroup difference-in-difference Cox regression analyses on the basis of stage, income, race, ethnicity, and geographic location. Adjusted linear difference-in-difference regressions evaluated the proportion of uninsured patients on the basis of expansion status after 2014. We evaluated adjusted Kaplan-Meier curves to examine differences on the basis of study period and expansion status. RESULTS: Our sample included 169,731 women, including 78,669 (46.3%) in expansion states and 91,062 (53.7%) in nonexpansion states. There was improved 2-year survival on adjusted difference-in-difference Cox regressions for women with ovarian cancer in expansion than in nonexpansion states after 2014 (hazard ratio, 0.88; 95% confidence interval, 0.82-0.94; P<.001) with no differences in endometrial, cervical, vaginal, vulvar, or combined gynecologic cancer sites on the basis of expansion status. On univariable subgroup difference-in-difference Cox analyses, women with ovarian cancer with stage III-IV disease (P=.008), non-Hispanic ethnicity (P=.042), those in the South (P=.016), and women with vulvar cancer in the Northeast (P=.022), had improved 2-year survival in expansion than in nonexpansion states after 2014. In contrast, women with cervical cancer in the South (P=.018) had worse 2-year survival in expansion than in nonexpansion states after 2014. All cancer sites had lower proportions of uninsured patients in expansion than in nonexpansion states after 2014. CONCLUSION: There was a significant association between Medicaid expansion and improved 2-year survival for women with ovarian cancer in states that expanded Medicaid after 2014. Despite improved insurance coverage, racial, ethnic, and regional survival differences exist between expansion and nonexpansion states.

Temporal trends of healthcare system use between symptomatic presentation and ovarian cancer diagnosis in the United States.

OBJECTIVE: To describe trends in healthcare system use over time between onset of classic ovarian cancer symptoms and ovarian cancer diagnosis in the United States. METHODS: A population-based study of the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare database was conducted on patients aged ≥66 years with stage II-IV epithelial ovarian cancer between 1992 and 2015 with at least one of the following diagnosis codes: abdominal pain, bloating, difficulty eating, and/or urinary symptoms. The outcomes were frequency of visit type, frequency of diagnostic modality, and Medicare reimbursement between first symptomatic claim and cancer diagnosis. Jonckheere-Terpstra and Cochran-Armitage tests were used to evaluate trends over time. RESULTS: Among 13 872 women, 13 541 (97.6%) had outpatient, 6466 (46.6%) had inpatient, and 4906 (35.4%) had emergency room visits. The frequency of outpatient (p<0.001) and emergency room visits (p<0.001) increased while the frequency of inpatient visits (p<0.001) decreased between 1992 and 2015. The median number of outpatient visits (p<0.001) and physician specialties seen (p<0.001) increased over time. The median hospital length of stay decreased from 10 days in 1992 to 5 days in 2015 (p<0.001). Between 1992 and 2015, the frequency of ultrasound decreased (p<0.001) while the frequency of computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, positron emission tomography imaging, and cancer antigen 125 tumor immunoassay increased (p<0.001). Median monthly total (p<0.001), inpatient (p<0.001), and outpatient (p=0.006) reimbursements decreased while emergency room reimbursements increased (p<0.001) over time. CONCLUSION: Healthcare reimbursement between symptomatic presentation and ovarian cancer diagnosis has decreased over time and may reflect the trends in fewer and shorter hospitalizations and increased use of emergency and outpatient management during the evaluation of symptoms of women with ovarian cancer.

Algorithm to Identify Incident Epithelial Ovarian Cancer Cases Using Claims Data.

PURPOSE: To create an algorithm to identify incident epithelial ovarian cancer cases in claims-based data sets and evaluate performance of the algorithm using SEER-Medicare claims data. METHODS: We created a five-step algorithm on the basis of clinical expertise to identify incident epithelial ovarian cancer cases using claims data for (1) ovarian cancer diagnosis, (2) receipt of platinum-based chemotherapy, (3) no claim for platinum-based chemotherapy but claim for tumor debulking surgery, (4) removed cases with nonplatinum chemotherapy, and (5) removed patients with prior claims with personal history of ovarian cancer code to exclude prevalent cases. We evaluated algorithm performance using SEER-Medicare claims data by creating four cohorts: incident epithelial ovarian cancer, a 5% random sample of cancer-free Medicare beneficiaries, a 5% random sample of incident nonovarian cancer, and prevalent ovarian cancer cases. RESULTS: Using SEER tumor registry data as the gold standard, our algorithm correctly classified 89.9% of incident epithelial ovarian cancer cases (cohort n = 572) and almost 100% of cancer-free controls (n = 97,127), nonovarian cancer (n = 714), and prevalent ovarian cancer cases (n = 3,712). The overall algorithm sensitivity was 89.9%, the positive predictive value was 93.8%, and the specificity and negative predictive value were > 99.9%. Patients were more likely to be correctly classified as incident ovarian cancer if they had stage III or IV disease compared with early stage I or II disease (93.5% v 83.7%, P < .01), and grade 1-4 compared with unknown grade tumors (93.8% v 81.4%, P < .01). CONCLUSION: Our algorithm correctly identified most incident epithelial ovarian cancer cases, especially those with advanced disease. This algorithm will facilitate research in other claims-based data sets where cancer registry data are unavailable.

Factors impacting the time to ovarian cancer diagnosis based on classic symptom presentation in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Patients with ovarian cancer often present with late-stage disease and nonspecific symptoms, but little is known about factors affecting the time to diagnosis (TTD) in the United States. METHODS: A retrospective, population-based study of the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare database was conducted. It included women 66 years old or older with stage II to IV epithelial ovarian cancer with at least 1 code for abdominal/pelvic pain, bloating, difficulty eating, or urinary symptoms within 1 year of the cancer diagnosis. TTD was defined from the first claim with a prespecified symptom to the ovarian cancer diagnosis. Kruskal-Wallis tests were used to assess for differences in TTD by group medians. Univariate and generalized linear models with a log-link function evaluated TTD by covariables. RESULTS: For the 13,872 women analyzed, the mean and median times to diagnosis were 2.9 and 1.1 months, respectively. The median TTD differed significantly by first symptom (P < .001), number of symptoms (P < .001), and first physician specialty seen (P < .001). In a multivariable analysis, TTD differed significantly according to race/ethnicity (P < .001), geographic region (P = .001), urban-rural location (P = .031), emergency room presentation (P < .001), and number of specialties seen (P < .001). A shorter TTD was associated with a diagnosis in 2006-2010 (relative risk [RR], 0.92; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.87-0.98) or 2011-2015 (RR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.81-0.93) in comparison with 1992-1999. CONCLUSIONS: The time from a symptomatic presentation to care to a diagnosis of ovarian cancer is influenced by clinical and demographic variables. This study's findings reinforce the importance of educating all physicians on ovarian cancer symptoms to aid in diagnosis. LAY SUMMARY: Ovarian cancer is often diagnosed once disease has spread because the classic symptoms of ovarian cancer-abdominal or pelvic pain, bloating, difficulty eating, and urinary issues-can be mistaken for other problems. This study examined the time between when women with classic ovarian cancer symptoms went to a physician and when they received a cancer diagnosis in a large database population. The authors found that the time to diagnosis differed according to the type and number of symptoms and what type of physician a woman saw as well as factors such as race, geographic location, and year of diagnosis.

Incidence of acute kidney injury after open gynecologic surgery in an enhanced recovery after surgery pathway.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the incidence of postoperative AKI after open gynecologic surgery within ERAS, compare AKI in pre-ERAS and ERAS cohorts, and identify factors associated with AKI. METHODS: We compared postoperative AKI in patients who underwent open gynecologic surgery at one institution before and after ERAS implementation. AKI was defined as acute risk, injury, or failure by RIFLE criteria. Pre-ERAS and ERAS cohorts were matched using propensity score analysis in a 1:1 fashion using the nearest neighbor technique. Chi-squared, Fisher's Exact, and Wilcoxon rank-sum tests were used. RESULTS: Among 1334 ERAS and 191 pre-ERAS patients, postoperative AKI incidence was higher in the ERAS cohort (13.1% vs 5.8%, p = .004). In 166 matched pairs, ERAS patients had higher incidence (16.9% vs 5.4%, p < .001) and odds (OR 3.54, 95% CI 1.61-7.76) of AKI. Within ERAS, AKI was associated with older age (median age 65 vs 57, p < .001), Charlson Comorbidity Index score ≥ 3 (71.4% vs 57.9%, p < .001), and higher intraoperative estimated blood loss (400 vs 225 mL, p < .001), fluid administration (net fluid balance +1535 vs 1261 mL, p < .001), and hypotension lasting >5 min (41.7% vs 30.7%, p < .001). ERAS patients with AKI had longer hospital stays (median 4 vs 3 days, p < .001) and more readmissions (19% vs. 10%, p < .001) and grade 3+ complications (26% vs. 7%, p < .001). CONCLUSIONS: The incidence and odds of postoperative AKI was higher after gynecologic surgery within ERAS, and patients with AKI were more likely to have complications. Potential strategies to prevent postoperative AKI include perioperative fluid and blood pressure optimization.

Continuous epidural infusion in gynecologic oncology patients undergoing exploratory laparotomy: The new standard for decreased postoperative pain and opioid use.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the incidence of postoperative complications and opioid pain medication usage in gynecologic oncology patients who did and did not receive an epidural prior to undergoing exploratory laparotomy. METHODS: Retrospective cohort study of all patients undergoing exploratory laparotomy with the gynecologic oncology division at Washington University in St Louis between January 2012 and October 2015. Data on demographics, pathology, postoperative pain and opioid use, and incidence of postoperative complications were collected. RESULTS: Five hundred and sixty-one patients underwent laparotomy, 305 with an epidural and 256 without. Patients with an epidural used significantly less hydromorphone in the post-anesthesia care unit (PACU) (p = 0.003) and on postoperative day (POD)#1 (p = 0.05), less total opioids on POD#0 (p < 0.01), and more non-opioid pain medication on POD#1-3 (p < 0.01). Patients with an epidural had lower pain scores in the PACU (p = 0.01), on POD#0 (p < 0.01), POD#1 (p < 0.01), and POD#3 (p = 0.03). Patients with epidurals had shorter hospital length of stay (p < 0.01), no difference in hospital readmission or incidence of venous thromboembolism up to 90 days postoperatively, longer duration of Foley catheter (20.4 vs 10.3 h, p = 0.02) with no difference in postoperative urinary tract infection, higher incidence of postoperative hypotension (63% vs 36.3%, p < 0.01), and lower incidence of wound complications (5% vs 14.1%, p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Perioperative epidurals used in patients undergoing major abdominal surgery correlate with decreased postoperative opioid use, increased use of non-opioid pain medications, and improved pain relief postoperatively with acceptable postoperative risks and should be standard of care for these patients.

Obesity counseling in obstetrics and gynecology: provider perceptions and barriers.

To determine how obstetricians and gynecologists (OB/GYNs) perceive the gynecologic health effects of obesity and to identify perceived obstacles to counseling. OB/GYNs with 3 St. Louis health systems were emailed a 46-question survey regarding physicians' role in counseling women on the health risks of obesity and barriers faced in achieving this counseling. Differences between respondents' gender, age, practice type, years in practice, and body mass index were assessed using Chi-square or Fisher's exact tests as appropriate. Of 318 OB/GYNs emailed, 134 completed surveys, including 82 generalists and 52 subspecialists. 93% of respondents believed it was necessary to educate patients on health risks of obesity. 90% and 75%, respectively, cited diagnoses of endometrial hyperplasia and cancer as teachable moments for counseling. The most frequently cited barriers to successful counseling were lack of time, referral services, and patient tools/information. Most did not believe they had adequate reimbursement (65%), training (53%) or educational resources (50%) to counsel patients. Survey answers differed by practice setting, gender, and provider age. Although most OB/GYN providers consider obesity counseling important, execution is hindered by perceived barriers that differ by provider gender, age, and practice type. For OB/GYNs, more effective weight management counseling will require better training and practice-specific strategies. Based on survey responses, better reimbursement combined with increased resources for appropriate referrals and cancer prevention counseling are needed in order to improve weight management implementation in OB/GYN. •The majority of OB/GYNs believe obesity counseling is important•Perceptions of obesity counseling differ based on provider/practice characteristics.•Lack of time, referral services, and patient tools are the biggest cited barriers to counseling.•Improved obesity counseling could improve downstream OB/GYN morbidities.

Two sisters with Mayer-Rokitansky-Küster-Hauser syndrome and serous adenocarcinoma of the ovary.

BACKGROUND: Mayer-Rokitansky-Küster-Hauser syndrome is a rare entity with proposed genetic underpinnings. Ovarian carcinoma has well-described genetic associations and syndromes, although much of the etiology of the disease remains unknown. CASES: Two sisters present in the 1970s with primary amenorrhea, 46, XX karyotypes, and absent uteri consistent with MRKH syndrome. In the 2010s, both sisters again present for care. Case 1 presents one sister with stage IIIC serous ovarian adenocarcinoma and negative BRCA panel. Case No 2 presents the other sister with stage IIIC serous ovarian adenocarcinoma and a negative panel for 32 genetic variants associated with ovarian carcinoma. CONCLUSION: The familial association of two rare diseases and negative genetic workup could point to a new genetic understanding of reproductive structure development and ovarian carcinogenesis.