Bowel Resection Outcomes in Ovarian Cancer Cytoreductive Surgery by Surgeon Specialty.

Abstract

Importance: Extensive bowel surgery is often necessary to achieve complete cytoreduction in patients with epithelial ovarian cancer. Regardless of who performs the surgery, it has been well documented that bowel resections are a high-risk procedure and an anastomotic leak is a severe complication that can occur. There are few studies addressing whether surgeon type impacts surgical outcomes in this patient population.

Objective: To compare surgical outcomes between gynecologic oncologist, general surgeons, and a 2-surgeon team approach for patients with advanced epithelial ovarian cancer who underwent bowel surgery during cytoreductive debulking.

Design, setting, participants: This retrospective cohort study used the American College of Surgeons' National Surgical Quality Improvement Program datasets from 2012 through 2020. The aforementioned years of the dataset were analyzed from March 2022 to March 2023 and reanalyzed in May 2024 for quality assurance. Analysis of cytoreductive surgeries performed by a gynecologic oncologist, a general surgeon, or a 2-surgeon team approach for patients with ovarian cancer recorded in National Surgical Quality Improvement Program datasets was included. The 2-surgeon team approach included any combination of the aforementioned surgical specialties.

Main outcome and measure: The primary outcome of interest was anastomotic leak after bowel surgery during ovarian cancer debulking.

Results: A total of 1810 patients were included in the study; in the general surgery cohort, mean (SD) patient age was 65.1 (11.1) years and mean (SD) body mass index (BMI) (calculated as weight in kilograms divided by height in meters squared) was 26.9 (7.4); in the gynecologic oncology cohort, mean (SD) patient age was 63.5 (11.7) years and mean BMI (SD) was 27.7 (6.5); and in the 2-surgeon team cohort, mean (SD) patient age 62.4 (12.1) years and mean (SD) BMI was 28.1 (7.0). Gynecologic oncologists performed 1217 cases (67.2%), general surgery performed 97 cases (5.4%), and 496 cases had 2-surgeon teams involved (27.4%). Bivariate analysis revealed an anastomotic leak rate of 3.6% for gynecologic oncologists, 5.2% for general surgeons, and 0.4% for cases that had 2 surgical teams involved (P < .001). By multivariable analysis, the adjusted odds ratio for anastomotic leak was 1.53 (95% CI, 0.59-3.96) for the general surgeon group (P = .38) vs an adjusted odds ratio of 0.11 (95% CI, 0.03-0.47) for the 2-surgeon team approach (P = .003) with the referent being gynecologic oncology.

Conclusion and relevance: In this study, the anastomotic leak rate was found to be lower when 2 surgeons participated in the case, regardless of the surgical specialty. These results suggest that team-based care improves surgical outcomes.