No abstract

IntroductionThe SARS-CoV-2 global pandemic has caused a crisis disrupting health systems worldwide. While efforts are being made to determine the extent of the disruption, the impact on gynecological oncology trainees/training has not been explored. We conducted an international survey of the impact of SARS-CoV-2 on clinical practice, medical education, and mental well-being of surgical gynecological oncology trainees.MethodsIn our cross-sectional study, a customized web-based survey was circulated to surgical gynecological oncology trainees from national/international organizations from May to November 2020. Validated questionnaires assessed mental well-being. The Wilcoxon rank-sum test and Fisher’s exact test were used to analyse differences in means and proportions. Multiple linear regression was used to evaluate the effect of variables on psychological/mental well-being outcomes. Outcomes included clinical practice, medical education, anxiety and depression, distress, and mental well-being.ResultsA total of 127 trainees from 34 countries responded. Of these, 52% (66/127) were from countries with national training programs (UK/USA/Netherlands/Canada/Australia) and 48% (61/127) from countries with no national training programs. Altogether, 28% (35/125) had suspected/confirmed COVID-19, 28% (35/125) experienced a fall in household income, 20% (18/90) were self-isolated from households, 45% (57/126) had to re-use personal protective equipment, and 22% (28/126) purchased their own. In total, 32.3% (41/127) of trainees (16.6% (11/66) from countries with a national training program vs 49.1% (30/61) from countries with no national training program, p=0.02) perceived they would require additional time to complete their training fellowship. The additional training time anticipated did not differ between trainees from countries with or without national training programs (p=0.11) or trainees at the beginning or end of their fellowship (p=0.12). Surgical exposure was reduced for 50% of trainees. Departmental teaching continued throughout the pandemic for 69% (87/126) of trainees, although at reduced frequency for 16.1% (14/87), and virtually for 88.5% (77/87). Trainees reporting adequate pastoral support (defined as allocation of a dedicated mentor/access to occupational health support services) had better mental well-being with lower levels of anxiety/depression (p=0.02) and distress (p<0.001). Trainees from countries with a national training program experienced higher levels of distress (p=0.01). Mean (SD) pre-pandemic mental well-being scores were significantly higher than post-pandemic scores (8.3 (1.6) vs 7 (1.8); p<0.01).ConclusionSARS-CoV-2 has negatively impacted the surgical training, household income, and psychological/mental well-being of surgical gynecological oncology trainees. The overall clinical impact was worse for trainees in countries with no national training program than for those in countries with a national training program, although national training program trainees reported greater distress. COVID-19 sickness increased anxiety/depression. The recovery phase must focus on improving mental well-being and addressing lost training opportunities.

Objective: To acquire a comprehensive assessment of the current status of implementation of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocols across Europe. Methods:The survey was launched by The European Network of Young Gynecologic Oncologists (ENYGO). A 45-item survey was disseminated online through the European Society of Gynecological Oncology (ESGO) Network database.Results: A total of 116 ESGO centers participated in the survey between December 2020 and June 2021. Overall, 80 (70%) centers reported that ERAS was implemented at their institution: 63% reported a length of stay (LOS) for advanced ovarian cancer surgery between 5 and 7 days; 57 (81%) centers reported a LOS between 2 and 4 days in patients who underwent an early-stage gynecologic cancer surgery. The ERAS items with high reported compliance (>75% "normally-always") included deep vein thrombosis prophylaxis (89%), antibiotic prophylaxis (79%), prevention of hypothermia (55%), and early mobilization (55%). The ERAS items that were poorly adhered to (less than 50%) included early removal of urinary catheter (33%), and avoidance of drains (25%). Conclusion: This survey shows broad implementation of ERAS protocols acrossEurope; however, a wide variation in adherence to the various ERAS protocol items was reported.

Background/Aim: The aim of this study was to conduct a review on less radical fertility-sparing surgical treatment for early-stage cervical cancer. Materials and Methods: We conducted a Medline search from 2014 to 2018 regarding less radical fertility-sparing techniques, such as simple trachelectomy or cervical conization, with pelvic lymphadenectomy. We also assessed the impact of the removal of the parametrium on the obstetric and oncologic outcome, in women who desire to preserve their fertility. Results: We analyzed studies about cervical conization and simple trachelectomy, together with pelvic lymphadenectomy in early-stage cervical cancer. We also assessed the importance of parametrial involvement in reducing morbidity, without jeopardizing the oncologic outcome of these patients. Studies demonstrate that in tumors ≤2 cm, without lymphovascular Space Invasion and without evidence of parametrial involvement, a less radical fertilitysparing surgical approach could increase pregnancy rates and have a positive effect on the quality of life of these patients. Conclusion: Standard fertility-sparing treatment for early-stage cervical cancer is still radical trachelectomy with pelvic lymphadenectomy. However, studies suggest that the omission of parametrectomy is a feasible and safe option. Simple trachelectomy or cervical conization, both combined with pelvic lymphadenectomy are acceptable approaches in a selected group of patients with early-stage cervical cancer.Cervical cancer represents the fourth most common malignancy in women, with over half a million new cases each year worldwide (1, 2). Cervical cancer appears between 30 and 40 years of age, and is attributed to the exposure of the affected women to the Human Papilloma virus and the long latency in the natural history of the infection (3). This implies that a large majority of newly diagnosed cervical cancer affects young women with childbearing potential who wish to preserve their fertility, after completion of their oncologic treatment. Due to improved, well established HPV-based screening programs and liquid-based cytology, but also higher public awareness, we have nowadays, more than ever before, the capacity of diagnosing the disease in still early stages and follow potentially less radical surgical options, which do not significantly compromise fertility (4).The standard, non-fertility-sparing, surgical treatment for early, locally limited disease (5), as described by the International Federation of Obstetrics & Gynecology (FIGO), is the radical hysterectomy with systematic pelvic lymphadenectomy. Through surgical advances such as nerve sparing dissection, sentinel lymph node techniques and centralization of care, surgical morbidity of radical cervical cancer surgery has been significantly reduced over the years. However, as any surgical approach, also radical hysterectomy harbors potential risks and carries morbidity, associated with short and long-term impact on patient's quality of life (6, 7). Moreover, due to the lack of randomized controlled ...

BackgroundThe European Society of Gynaecological Oncology (ESGO) and partners are committed to improving the training for gynecologic oncology fellows. The aim of this survey was to assess the type and level of training in cervical cancer surgery and to investigate whether the Laparoscopic Approach to Cervical Cancer (LACC) trial results impacted training in radical surgery for gynecologic oncology fellows.MethodsIn June 2020, a 47-question electronic survey was shared with European Network of Young Gynaecologic Oncologists (ENYGO) members. Specialist fellows in obstetrics and gynecology, and gynecologic oncology, from high- and low-volume centers, who started training between January 1, 2017 and January 1, 2020 or started before January 1, 2017 but finished their training at least 6 months after the LACC trial publication (October 2018), were included.Results81 of 125 (64.8%) respondents were included. The median time from the start of the fellowship to completion of the survey was 28 months (range 6–48). 56 (69.1%) respondents were still fellows-in-training. 6 of 56 (10.7%) and 14 of 25 (56.0%) respondents who were still in training and completed the fellowship, respectively, performed ≥10 radical hysterectomies during their training. Fellows trained in an ESGO accredited center had a higher chance to perform sentinel lymph node biopsy (60.4% vs 30.3%; p=0.027). There was no difference in the mean number of radical hysterectomies performed by fellows during fellowship before and after the LACC trial publication (8±12.0 vs 7±8.4, respectively; p=0.46). A significant reduction in number of minimally invasive radical hysterectomies was noted when comparing the period before and after the LACC trial (38.5% vs 13.8%, respectively; p<0.001).ConclusionExposure to radical surgery for cervical cancer among gynecologic oncology fellows is low. Centralization of cervical cancer cases to high-volume centers may provide an increase in fellows’ exposure to radical procedures. The LACC trial publication was associated with a decrease in minimally invasive radical hysterectomies performed by fellows.