Article Text

Download PDFPDF
EP872 Ovarian cancer and HIPEC: survey for causes, symptoms and treatment multidisciplinary approach – the gynae-oncologists perspective
  1. C Iavazzo1,
  2. M Tsiatas2,
  3. A Christopoulou3,
  4. N Kopanakis4,
  5. J Spiliotis5 and
  6. P Sugarbaker6
  1. 1Gynaecological Oncology, Metaxa Cancer Hospital, Piraeus
  2. 2Medical Oncology Department, Athens Medical Centre, Athens
  3. 3Medical Oncology Department, Saint Andrews Hospital, Patra
  4. 4Surgical Oncology, Metaxa Cancer Hospital, Piraeus
  5. 5Surgical Oncology and HIPEC Department, European Interbalkan Medical Centre, Thessaloniki, Greece
  6. 6Center for Gastrointestinal Malignancies, Center for Gastrointestinal Malignancies, Washington, WA, USA


Introduction/Background This research sought to understand Gynaecologists Oncologists knowledge of, experience with, and attitudes toward the use of HIPEC in ovarian cancer patients.

Methodology A 17-question, self-report survey request was emailed to Gynaecologists Oncologists prior to PSOGI International Symposium on Advanced Ovarian Cancer, Athens April 11th–13th 2019. Doctors submitted responses on the relevant website.

Results Survey responses were completed by 132 Gynae-Oncologist and reported as a proportion for each query. Sixty percent of the responders were European, 75% male doctors and only 6% were operating on more than 50 patients per year. Ninetyfive percent identified a possible role of pelvic/paraaortic lymphadenectomy during debulking surgery while 48% during fertility sparing operations. Only 25% of the responders check always the BRCA status of their patients however 94% suggest the management can differentiate based on molecular profiling. Sixteen per cent and 9% avoid primary debulking in ovarian cancer patients with mesenteric disease and upper abdominal disease respectively. Fortyseven per cent consider acceptable to administer neoadjuvant chemotherapy based on positive cytology. Fortyeight per cent recognise a possible role of HIPEC during interval debulking, 44.7% the value of surgery in cancer recurrence and 68% the role of HIPEC in recurrent cases. Fortytwo percent are not aware of any evidence regarding the possible role of PIPAC in ovarian cancer. Seventyfive per cent prefer interval debulking for advanced ovarian cancer but only 3% use HIPEC. Tumor resectablility is assessed by 48.5% with upfront laparoscopy. Only 45.5% recognise a survival benefit in patients undergoing extended surgical procedures while the main areas of residual tumor after primary debulking are either mesenteric disease (59.8%) or at porta hepatis (20.5%). Regarding prevention only 18.2% suggest a prophylactic salpingectomy.

Conclusion We present the findings of our survey which are possibly mirroring the everyday approach of ovarian cancer patients from the Gynae-Oncologists perspective.

Disclosure Nothing to disclose.

Statistics from

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.