Synoptic operative reporting in cancer surgery: A scoping review

Background: Narrative operative reports (NOR) are important for cancer management but often lack key infor-mation. This review investigated the efficacy of synoptic operative reports (SORs) for cancer operations compared to NORs. Methods: A database search included published studies up to October 31, 2021. Overall report completeness and reporting frequencies of cancer elements were descriptively compared between NORs and SORs. Results: Among 4353 studies, 32 were included. 47% of studies compared NORs to SORs. Overall completeness favored SORs (80 +/- 19%) over NORs (47 +/- 18%, p < 0.001). Essential cancer operative report elements including tumor location (NOR: 51 +/- 28%, SOR: 89 +/- 11%, p < 0.001), presence of metastases (NOR: 36 +/- 33%, SOR: 96 +/- 5%, p < 0.001), and final resection margins (NOR: 39 +/- 30%, SOR: 87 +/- 17%, p < 0.001) demon-strated higher mean reporting frequencies in SORs. Conclusion: Overall completeness and reporting of cancer elements were superior in SORs. Although standardi-zation of SORs requires further research, transition from NORs to SORs may improve the quality of postoperative cancer care.

Automated summary

This review examined the effectiveness of synoptic operative reports (SORs) compared to narrative operative reports (NORs) in cancer operations. The results showed that SORs were more complete overall and had higher reporting frequencies for key cancer elements such as tumor location, presence of metastases, and final resection margins. Therefore, transitioning from NORs to SORs may improve the quality of postoperative cancer care.