Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38127216›Full record

ArticleAnnals of surgical oncology2024

Surgeon Perspectives on the Management of Aborted Cancer Surgery: Results of a Society of Surgical Oncology Member Survey.

Alexandra G Lopez-Aguiar, Angela Sarna, Sharla Wells-DiGregorio, Emily Huang, Peter J Kneuertz, Joal Beane, Alex Kim, Aslam Ejaz, Timothy M Pawlik, Jordan M Cloyd

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Annals of surgical oncology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Early Palliative Care Following Aborted Cancer Surgery: Results of a Prospective Feasibility Trial.Annals of surgery open : perspectives of surgical history, education, and clinical approaches · 2024
    Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Alexandra G Lopez-AguiarDivision of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, OH, USA.
Angela SarnaDivision of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, OH, USA.
Sharla Wells-DiGregorioDivision of Palliative Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, OH, USA.
Emily HuangDivision of Colorectal Surgery, Department of Surgery, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, OH, USA.
Peter J KneuertzDivision of Thoracic Surgery, Department of Surgery, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, OH, USA.
Joal BeaneDivision of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, OH, USA.
Alex KimDivision of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, OH, USA.
Aslam EjazDivision of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, OH, USA.
Timothy M PawlikDivision of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, OH, USA.
Jordan M CloydDivision of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, OH, USA. jordan.cloyd@osumc.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2373-8433

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWhile surgery is generally necessary for most solid-organ cancers, curative-intent resection is occasionally aborted due to unanticipated unresectability or occult metastases. Following aborted cancer surgery (ACS), patients have unique and complex care needs and yet little is known about the optimal approach to their management.

objectiveThe aim of this study was to define the practice patterns and perspectives of an international cohort of cancer surgeons on the management of ACS.

methodsA validated survey assessing surgeon perspectives on patient care needs and management following ACS was developed. The survey was distributed electronically to members of the Society of Surgical Oncology (SSO).

resultsAmong 190 participating surgeons, mean age was 49 ± 11 years, 69% were male, 61% worked at an academic institution, and most had a clinical practice focused on liver/pancreas (30%), breast (23%), or melanoma/sarcoma cancers (20%). Participants estimated that ACS occurred in 7 ± 6% of their cancer operations, most often due to occult metastases (67%) or local unresectability (30%). Most surgeons felt (very) comfortable addressing their patients' surgical needs (92%) and cancer treatment-related questions (90%), but fewer expressed comfort addressing psychosocial needs (83%) or symptom-control needs (69%). While they perceived discussing next available therapies as the patients' most important priority after ACS, surgeons reported avoiding postoperative complications as their most important priority (p < 0.001). While 61% and 27% reported utilizing palliative care and psychosocial oncology, respectively, in these situations, 46% noted care coordination as a barrier to addressing patient care needs.

conclusionsResults from this SSO member survey suggest that ACS is relatively common and associated with unique patient care needs. Surgeons may feel less comfortable assessing psychosocial and symptom-control needs, highlighting the need for novel patient-centered approaches.

Indexed as

NeoplasmsSurgeonsSurgical OncologyAdultFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPalliative CareSurveys and QuestionnairesBad newsOccult metastasesPalliative carePatient-centered outcomesSupportive careSurgical oncology

Identifiers

PMID38127216

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.