METHODS: The European Society of Gynaecological Oncology council nominated an international multidisciplinary development group made of practicing clinicians who have demonstrated leadership and interest in the care of ovarian cancer (20 experts across Europe). To ensure that the statements are evidence based, the current literature identified from a systematic search has been reviewed and critically appraised. In the absence of any clear scientific evidence, judgment was based on the professional experience and consensus of the development group (expert agreement). The guidelines are thus based on the best available evidence and expert agreement. Before publication, the guidelines were reviewed by 66 international reviewers independent from the development group including patients representatives. RESULTS: The guidelines cover preoperative workup, specialized multidisciplinary decision making, and surgical management of diagnosed epithelial ovarian, fallopian tube, and peritoneal cancers. The guidelines are also illustrated by algorithms.
OBJECTIVES: The surgical management of advanced ovarian cancer involves complex surgery. Implementation of a quality management program has a major impact on survival. The goal of this work was to develop a list of quality indicators (QIs) for advanced ovarian cancer surgery that can be used to audit and improve the clinical practice. This task has been carried out under the auspices of the European Society of Gynaecologic Oncology (ESGO). METHODS: Quality indicators were based on scientific evidence and/or expert consensus. A 4-step evaluation process included a systematic literature search for the identification of potential QIs and the documentation of scientific evidence, physical meetings of an ad hoc multidisciplinarity International Development Group, an internal validation of the targets and scoring system, and an external review process involving physicians and patients. RESULTS: Ten structural, process, or outcome indicators were selected. Quality indicators 1 to 3 are related to achievement of complete cytoreduction, caseload in the center, training, and experience of the surgeon. Quality indicators 4 to 6 are related to the overall management, including active participation to clinical research, decision-making process within a structured multidisciplinary team, and preoperative workup. Quality indicator 7 addresses the high value of adequate perioperative management. Quality indicators 8 to 10 highlight the need of recording pertinent information relevant to improvement of quality. An ESGO-approved template for the operative report has been designed. Quality indicators were described using a structured format specifying what the indicator is measuring, measurability specifications, and targets. Each QI was associated with a score, and an assessment form was built. CONCLUSIONS: The ESGO quality criteria can be used for self-assessment, for institutional or governmental quality assurance programs, and for the certification of centers. Quality indicators and corresponding targets give practitioners and health administrators a quantitative basis for improving care and organizational processes in the surgical management of advanced ovarian cancer.
