Literature DB >> 25088866

Perioperative adverse events after minimally invasive abdominal sacrocolpopexy.

Cecile A Unger1, Marie Fidela R Paraiso2, John E Jelovsek2, Matthew D Barber2, Beri Ridgeway2.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Our first objective was to compare peri- and postoperative adverse events between robotic-assisted laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy (RSC) and conventional laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy (LSC) in a cohort of women who underwent these procedures at a tertiary care center. Our second objective was to explore whether hysterectomy and rectopexy at the time of sacrocolpopexy were associated with these adverse events. STUDY
DESIGN: This was a retrospective cohort study of women who underwent either RSC or LSC with or without concomitant hysterectomy and/or rectopexy from 2006-2012. Once patients were identified as either having undergone RSC or LSC, the electronic medical record was queried for demographic, peri-, and postoperative data.
RESULTS: Four hundred six women met study inclusion criteria. Mean age and body mass index of all the women were 58 ± 10 years and 27.9 ± 4.9 kg/m(2). The women who underwent RSC were older (60 ± 9 vs 57 ± 10 years, respectively; P = .009) and more likely to be postmenopausal (90.9% vs 79.1%, respectively; P = .05). RSC cases were associated with a higher intraoperative bladder injury rate (3.3% vs 0.4%, respectively; P = .04), a higher rate of estimated blood loss of ≥500 mL (2.5% vs 0, respectively; P = .01), and reoperation rate for pelvic organ prolapse (4.9% vs 1.1%, respectively; P = .02) compared with LSC. Concomitant rectopexy was associated with a higher risk of transfusion (2.8% vs 0.3%, respectively; P = .04), pelvic/abdominal abscess formation (11.1% vs 0.8%, respectively; P < .001), and osteomyelitis (5.6% vs 0, respectively; P < .001). The mesh erosion rate for all the women was 2.7% and was not statistically different between LSC and RSC and for patients who underwent concomitant hysterectomy and those who did not.
CONCLUSION: Peri- and postoperative outcomes after RSC and LSC are favorable, with few adverse outcomes. RSC is associated with a higher rate of bladder injury, estimated blood loss ≥500 mL, and reoperation for recurrent pelvic organ prolapse; otherwise, the rate of adverse events is similar between the 2 modalities. Concomitant rectopexy is associated with a higher rate of postoperative abscess and osteomyelitis complications.
Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  minimally invasive sacrocolpopexy; perioperative adverse events; rectopexy

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25088866     DOI: 10.1016/j.ajog.2014.07.054

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol        ISSN: 0002-9378            Impact factor:   8.661


  19 in total

Review 1.  Robotic Sacrocolpopexy-Is It the Treatment of Choice for Advanced Apical Pelvic Organ Prolapse?

Authors:  Janine L Oliver; Ja-Hong Kim
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2017-09       Impact factor: 3.092

Review 2.  Robotic pelvic organ prolapse surgery.

Authors:  Kamran P Sajadi; Howard B Goldman
Journal:  Nat Rev Urol       Date:  2015-03-24       Impact factor: 14.432

3.  "Occult" pelvic abscess following previous robotic sacrocolpopexy.

Authors:  Brian J Linder; John B Gebhart
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2018-08-16       Impact factor: 2.894

Review 4.  Multidisciplinary Approach to the Treatment of Concomitant Rectal and Vaginal Prolapse.

Authors:  Karl Jallad; Brooke Gurland
Journal:  Clin Colon Rectal Surg       Date:  2016-06

Review 5.  Minimally Invasive Sacrocolpopexy: How to Avoid Short- and Long-Term Complications.

Authors:  Catherine A Matthews
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2016-11       Impact factor: 3.092

6.  Combined rectopexy and sacrocolpopexy is safe for correction of pelvic organ prolapse.

Authors:  Cristina B Geltzeiler; Elisa H Birnbaum; Matthew L Silviera; Matthew G Mutch; Joel Vetter; Paul E Wise; Steven R Hunt; Sean C Glasgow
Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis       Date:  2018-08-03       Impact factor: 2.571

7.  Perioperative adverse events in women undergoing concurrent urogynecologic and gynecologic oncology surgeries for suspected malignancy.

Authors:  Emily R W Davidson; Katherine Woodburn; Mariam AlHilli; Cecile A Ferrando
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2018-10-02       Impact factor: 2.894

8.  Complications and reoperations after laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy with a mean follow-up of 4 years.

Authors:  David Vandendriessche; Julie Sussfeld; Géraldine Giraudet; Jean-Philippe Lucot; Hélène Behal; Michel Cosson
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2016-08-22       Impact factor: 2.894

9.  The effect of surgical start time in patients undergoing minimally invasive sacrocolpopexy.

Authors:  Karl Jallad; Matthew D Barber; Beri Ridgeway; Marie Fidela R Paraiso; Cecile A Unger
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2016-03-30       Impact factor: 2.894

10.  Route of hysterectomy during minimally invasive sacrocolpopexy does not affect postoperative outcomes.

Authors:  Emily R W Davidson; Tonya N Thomas; Erika J Lampert; Marie Fidela R Paraiso; Cecile A Ferrando
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2018-10-18       Impact factor: 2.894

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.