Literature DB >> 25655043

Trends in the implementation of advanced minimally invasive gynecologic surgical procedures in the Netherlands.

Sara R C Driessen1, Niki L M Baden1, Erik W van Zwet2, Andries R H Twijnstra1, Frank Willem Jansen3.   

Abstract

STUDY
OBJECTIVES: To assess the implementation of advanced laparoscopic gynecologic surgical procedures, assess the number of gynecologists performing these procedures, and highlight the distribution of surgical approaches to hysterectomy.
DESIGN: Observational multicenter study. DESIGN CLASSIFICATION: Canadian Task Force classification II-2.
SETTING: All hospitals in The Netherlands. SAMPLE: Minimally invasive surgical procedures performed in all 90 hospitals in the year 2012, and the number of gynecologists performing these procedures. Data were compared with national surveys conducted in 2002 and 2007.
INTERVENTIONS: The number of advanced laparoscopic gynecologic procedures, the number of gynecologists performing these procedures, and the distribution of approaches to hysterectomy were collected through a Web-based questionnaire.
MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The response rate was 96% (86 of 90 hospitals). A total of 4979 advanced laparoscopic gynecologic procedures were performed in 2012 (mean per hospital, 58; median, 50.5; SD, 44.4), which is a significant increase over 2007 (95% CI, 30.3-46.5; p < .001). The proportion of laparoscopic hysterectomy increased from 3% in 2002 to 10% in 2007 and to 36% in 2012. The proportions of abdominal hysterectomy (68% in 2002, 54% in 2007, and 39% in 2012) and vaginal hysterectomy (29% in 2002, 36% in 2007, and 25% in 2012) decreased significantly. However, approximately 37% of gynecologists (n = 76) and 12% of hospitals (n = 9) performed fewer than 20 advanced laparoscopic procedures (level 3 and level 4) annually.
CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of advanced laparoscopic gynecologic procedures has accelerated tremendously in the last decade, owing mainly to the increased number of laparoscopic hysterectomies. A significant shift has occurred from abdominal and vaginal hysterectomies toward a laparoscopic approach. The vaginal hysterectomy should be brought back in focus, to prevent the deterioration of skills needed to perform this least invasive approach. Furthermore, the introduction of case volume as quality assessment is sure to have consequences for daily gynecologic surgical practice in The Netherlands.
Copyright © 2015 AAGL. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Keywords:  Gynecology; Hysterectomy; Implementation; Laparoscopy; Surgical volume

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25655043     DOI: 10.1016/j.jmig.2015.01.026

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Minim Invasive Gynecol        ISSN: 1553-4650            Impact factor:   4.137


  10 in total

1.  1 vs 3 days laparoscopic suturing courses: is it feasible to design a valid training curriculum?

Authors:  I M Argay; T Lawrence; K Afors; G Centini; L Lazzeri; N Habib; N Amoruso; E Zupi; R Campo; A Wattiez
Journal:  Facts Views Vis Obgyn       Date:  2020-10-08

2.  A new approach to simplify surgical colpotomy in laparoscopic hysterectomy.

Authors:  L van den Haak; J P T Rhemrev; M D Blikkendaal; A C M Luteijn; J J van den Dobbelsteen; S R C Driessen; F W Jansen
Journal:  Gynecol Surg       Date:  2016-01-12

3.  Medical malpractice claims in laparoscopic gynecologic surgery: a Dutch overview of 20 years.

Authors:  Evelien M Sandberg; Esmée M Bordewijk; Désirée Klemann; Sara R C Driessen; Andries R H Twijnstra; Frank Willem Jansen
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2017-06-20       Impact factor: 4.584

4.  Laparoscopic hysterectomy for benign indications: clinical practice guideline.

Authors:  Evelien M Sandberg; Wouter J K Hehenkamp; Peggy M Geomini; Petra F Janssen; Frank Willem Jansen; Andries R H Twijnstra
Journal:  Arch Gynecol Obstet       Date:  2017-07-26       Impact factor: 2.344

5.  Identification of risk factors in minimally invasive surgery: a prospective multicenter study.

Authors:  Sara R C Driessen; Evelien M Sandberg; Sharon P Rodrigues; Erik W van Zwet; Frank Willem Jansen
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2016-10-31       Impact factor: 4.584

6.  Perioperative surgical outcome of conventional and robot-assisted total laparoscopic hysterectomy.

Authors:  W J van Weelden; B B M Gordon; E A Roovers; A A Kraayenbrink; C I M Aalders; F Hartog; F P H L J Dijkhuizen
Journal:  Gynecol Surg       Date:  2017-04-25

Review 7.  Laparoendoscopic single-site surgery versus conventional laparoscopy for hysterectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Evelien M Sandberg; Claire F la Chapelle; Marjolein M van den Tweel; Jan W Schoones; Frank Willem Jansen
Journal:  Arch Gynecol Obstet       Date:  2017-03-29       Impact factor: 2.344

8.  A retrospective study of 323 total laparoscopic hysterectomy cases for various indications and a case report treating caesarean scar pregnancy.

Authors:  Wataru Isono; Akira Tsuchiya; Michiko Honda; Ako Saito; Hiroko Tsuchiya; Reiko Matsuyama; Akihisa Fujimoto; Masashi Kawamoto; Osamu Nishii
Journal:  J Med Case Rep       Date:  2020-12-14

9.  Senhance Robotic Platform System for Gynecological Surgery.

Authors:  Steven D McCarus
Journal:  JSLS       Date:  2021 Jan-Mar       Impact factor: 2.172

10.  Hospital versus individual surgeon's performance in laparoscopic hysterectomy.

Authors:  Sara R C Driessen; Markus Wallwiener; Florin-Andrei Taran; Sarah L Cohen; Bernhard Kraemer; Christian W Wallwiener; Erik W van Zwet; Sara Y Brucker; Frank Willem Jansen
Journal:  Arch Gynecol Obstet       Date:  2016-09-15       Impact factor: 2.344

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.