Desire to homogenize advanced stage ovarian cancer management has led to a debate on the need to centralize cares. The aim was to assess current practices to compare them with centralization motivation and to overview possible perspectives of evolution.
An anonymous questionnaire of 57 questions has been submitted from August 2021 to October 2021 to members of French gynecological oncological surgical societies. Questions encompassed all aspects of ovarian cancer surgical management, including institutions, technics, indications, and outcomes.
Of the 40 responses, 77.5% managed less than 20 cases by themselves, but 67.5% practiced in institution managing more than 30 cases annually. Since the LION trial results' publication, 95% of practitioners have evolved their lymphadenectomy indications. More than 10% of surgery needed digestive resection for 90% of practitioners. Digestive resections rate was significantly higher for practitioners managing more than 20 cases (p<0.01), but it was not for institutions managing more than 30 cases annually (p=0,07). Surgeons performing more than 20 ovarian cancers annually reported less severe complications (p=0.04) compared to low-volume surgeons independently of institution volume. For more than a quarter of the practitioners, less than half of the patients can benefit from the enhanced recovery after surgery program despite benefits of such care.
Our survey provides an overview of French practices in ovarian cancer management. This survey seems to confirm that minimum volume thresholds could lead to better outcomes. It also underlines that individual performances are as valuable as center volume.