Same-day Hospital Discharge after Minimally Invasive Hysterectomy in a Gynecologic Oncology Practice: Feasibility, Safety, Predictors of Admission, and Adverse Outcomes.

STUDY OBJECTIVES: (1) Determine the feasibility and safety of same-day hospital discharge (SDHD) after minimally invasive hysterectomy (MIH) in a gynecologic oncology practice and (2) detail predictors of immediate postoperative hospital admission and multiple 30-day adverse outcomes. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: University of Pittsburgh Medical Center Magee-Womens Hospital. PATIENTS: MIH by a gynecologic oncologist between January 2017 and July 2019. INTERVENTIONS: Clinicopathologic, operative, and medical characteristics, as well as 30-day postoperative complications, emergency department (ED) encounters, and hospital readmissions were extracted. Admitted and SDHD patients were compared using descriptive, chi-square, Fisher's exact, t test, and logistic regression analyses. Univariate and multivariable analyses (MVA) revealed predictors of postoperative hospital admission, 30-day readmission, and a 30-day composite adverse event variable (all-reported postoperative complications, ED encounter, and/or readmission). MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: A total of 1124 patients were identified, of which 77.3% had cancer or precancer; 775 patients (69.0%) underwent SDHD. On MVA, predictors of postoperative admission included older age, distance from hospital, longer procedure length, operative complications, start time after 2 PM, radical hysterectomy, minilaparotomy, adhesiolysis, cardiac disease, cerebrovascular disease, venous thromboembolism, diabetes, and neurologic disorders (p <.05). Moreover, 30-day adverse outcomes were rare (complication 8.7% National Surgical Quality Improvement Program/11.9% all-reported; ED encounter 5.0%; readmission 3.6%). SDHD patients had fewer all-reported complications (10.3% vs 15.5%, p = .01), no difference in ED encounters (4.6% vs 5.7%, p = .44), and fewer observed readmissions (2.8% vs 5.2%, p = .05). Predictors of readmission were identified on univariate; MVA was not feasible given the low number of events. Longer procedure length and cardiac and obstructive pulmonary disease were predictors of the composite adverse event variable (p <.05). CONCLUSION: SDHD is feasible and safe after MIH within a representative gynecologic oncology practice. Clinicopathologic, medical, and surgical predictors of multiple adverse outcomes were comprehensively described. By identifying patients at high risk of postoperative adverse events, we can direct SDHD selection in the absence of standardized institutional and/or national consensus guidelines and identify patients for prehabilitation and increased perioperative support.

Novel Therapies in Gynecologic Cancer.

During the past decade, considerable strides have been made in the understanding and treatment of gynecologic cancers. The advent of PARP inhibitors, antiangiogenic therapies, immunotherapy combinations, and targeted agents have altered the standard of care in ovarian, endometrial, and cervical cancers. However, continued advancement in the treatment of gynecologic cancers is critical. Fortunately, exciting work defining new therapeutic targets and novel treatment strategies is on the horizon. Here, we discuss emerging treatments for gynecologic cancers, including endometrial, cervical, ovarian, and rare gynecologic cancers. We highlight research that has deepened our understanding of the unique biology and molecular underpinnings of these cancers and is being translated into powerful new treatment approaches. We particularly highlight the advent of immunotherapy in endometrial cancer; radiosensitizers in cervical, vaginal, and vulvar cancers; targeted therapies in ovarian cancer; and molecularly driven approaches to treat rare gynecologic cancers. Continued basic, translational, and clinical research holds the promise to change the landscape of gynecologic cancer and improve the lives of all women impacted by these diseases.

Aspirin use correlates with survival in women with clear cell ovarian cancer.

Data from colon, breast and prostate cancers suggest that aspirin users have reduced mortality. While the direct mechanism remains uncertain, aspirin can suppress the COX-dependent and independent pathways involved in tumor progression. We hypothesized that aspirin users with clear cell ovarian cancer would have improved survival outcomes. We performed a retrospective review of patients with clear cell ovarian cancer diagnosed between 1995 and 2010, and followed outcomes through 2016. Patients underwent primary cytoreductive surgery followed by platinum-based chemotherapy. Aspirin use was defined by medication documentation in two records more than six months apart. Statistical tests included Fisher's exact, Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression analyses. Seventy-seven patients met inclusion criteria. Fifty-four patients (70%) had stage I-II disease. Thirteen patients (17%) used aspirin. Aspirin users had a statistically longer disease-free survival compared to non-users (HR 0.13, p = .018). While median disease-free survival was not reached for either group, 1 of 13 (8%) aspirin users recurred at 24 months, compared to 18 of 64 (28%) non-users. Aspirin users demonstrated longer overall survival (HR 0.13, p = .015). Median survival was not reached for aspirin users, compared to 166 months for non-users. Aspirin use retained significance (HR 0.13, p = .044) after controlling for age, stage and cytoreductive status. In this small cohort of women with clear cell ovarian cancer, aspirin use correlated with improved disease-free and overall survival, and retained independent significance as a positive prognostic factor. Further research is warranted to confirm these findings before considering aspirin as a therapeutic intervention.