Literature DB >> 26827905

Impact of the 2014 Food and Drug Administration Warnings Against Power Morcellation.

Deirdre A Lum1, Eric R Sokol2, Jonathan S Berek2, Jay Schulkin3, Ling Chen4, Cora-Ann McElwain3, Jason D Wright4.   

Abstract

STUDY
OBJECTIVE: To determine whether members of the AAGL Advancing Minimally Invasive Gynecologic Surgery Worldwide (AAGL) and members of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists Collaborative Ambulatory Research Network (ACOG CARN) have changed their clinical practice based on the 2014 Food and Drug Administration (FDA) warnings against power morcellation.
DESIGN: A survey study.
SETTING: Participants were invited to complete this online survey (Canadian Task Force classification II-2). PATIENTS: AAGL and ACOG CARN members.
INTERVENTIONS: An online anonymous survey with 24 questions regarding demographics and changes to clinical practice during minimally invasive myomectomies and hysterectomies based on the 2014 FDA warnings against power morcellation.
MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: A total of 615 AAGL members and 54 ACOG CARN members responded (response rates of 8.2% and 60%, respectively). Before the FDA warnings, 85.8% and 86.9%, respectively, were using power morcellation during myomectomies and hysterectomies. After the FDA warnings, 71.1% and 75.8% of respondents reported stopping the use of power morcellation during myomectomies and hysterectomies. The most common reasons cited for discontinuing the use of power morcellation or using it less often were hospital mandate (45.6%), the concern for legal consequences (16.1%), and the April 2014 FDA warning (13.9%). Nearly half of the respondents (45.6%) reported an increase in their rate of laparotomy. Most (80.3%) believed that the 2014 FDA warnings have not led to an improvement in patient outcomes and have led to harming patients (55.1%).
CONCLUSION: AAGL and ACOG CARN respondents reported decreased use of power morcellation during minimally invasive gynecologic surgery after the 2014 FDA warnings, the most common reason cited being hospital mandate. Rates of laparotomy have increased. Most members surveyed believe that the FDA warnings have not improved patient outcomes.
Copyright © 2016 AAGL. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  American Association of Gynecologic Laparoscopists; American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists; Food and Drug Administration warning; Power morcellation; Survey

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 26827905     DOI: 10.1016/j.jmig.2016.01.019

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


  10 in total

1.  Laparoscopic hysterectomy with morcellation vs abdominal hysterectomy for presumed fibroids: an updated decision analysis following the 2014 Food and Drug Administration safety communications.

Authors:  Matthew T Siedhoff; Kemi M Doll; Daniel L Clarke-Pearson; Sarah E Rutstein
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2016-11-24       Impact factor: 8.661

Review 2.  Rethinking the Issue of Power Morcellation of Uterine Fibroids: Is Morcellation the Real Problem or Is this Another Symptom of Disparity in Healthcare Provision?

Authors:  Funlayo Odejinmi; Mehrnoosh Aref-Adib; Natasha Liou; Michail Sideris; Rebecca Mallick
Journal:  In Vivo       Date:  2019 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 2.155

3.  Practice Patterns and Complications of Benign Hysterectomy Following the FDA Statement Warning Against the Use of Power Morcellation.

Authors:  Francesco Multinu; Jvan Casarin; Kristine T Hanson; Stefano Angioni; Andrea Mariani; Elizabeth B Habermann; Shannon K Laughlin-Tommaso
Journal:  JAMA Surg       Date:  2018-06-20       Impact factor: 14.766

4.  To Morcellate or Not to Morcellate: A Cross-Sectional Survey Of Gynecologic Surgeons.

Authors:  Farr Nezhat; Radu Apostol; Alexis D Greene; Marjorie L Pilkinton
Journal:  JSLS       Date:  2017 Jan-Mar       Impact factor: 2.172

5.  Patients' Knowledge and Perceptions of Morcellation.

Authors:  Erika L Mowers; Courtney S Lim; Bethany Skinner; Nichole Mahnert; Sara R Till; Sawsan As-Sanie
Journal:  JSLS       Date:  2017 Jul-Sep       Impact factor: 2.172

6.  Incidence and groups at risk for unexpected uterine leiomyosarcoma: a Dutch nationwide cohort study.

Authors:  Lukas van den Haak; Cor D de Kroon; Milo I Warmerdam; Albert G Siebers; Johann P Rhemrev; Theodoor E Nieboer; Frank Willem Jansen
Journal:  Arch Gynecol Obstet       Date:  2018-11-30       Impact factor: 2.344

7.  Laparoscopic-assisted myomectomy with uterine artery occlusion at a freestanding ambulatory surgery center: a case series.

Authors:  Paul MacKoul; Natalya Danilyants; Faraj Touchan; Louise Q van der Does; Leah R Haworth; Nilofar Kazi
Journal:  Gynecol Surg       Date:  2020-06-16

8.  Preclinical safety testing and initial experience of a morcellation bag with four sealable ports.

Authors:  Michael Anapolski; Anja Schellenberger; Ibrahim Alkatout; Dimitrios Panayotopoulos; Alexander Gut; Stefan Soltesz; Sven Schiermeier; Thomas Papathemelis; Günter K Noé
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2021-10-22       Impact factor: 4.379

9.  Current Methods of Tissue Extraction in Minimally Invasive Surgical Treatment of Uterine Fibroids.

Authors:  Renita Kim; Kristen Pepin; Monalisa Dmello; Nisse Clark; Mobolaji Ajao; Jon Einarsson; Sarah Cohen Rassier
Journal:  JSLS       Date:  2022 Jul-Sep       Impact factor: 1.789

10.  Pressure-Induced Fibroid Ischemia: First-In-Human Experience with a Novel Device for Laparoscopic Treatment of Symptomatic Uterine Fibroids.

Authors:  Michael G Tal; Ran Keidar; Gilad Magnazi; Ohad Henn; Jin Hee Kim; Scott G Chudnoff; Kevin J Stepp
Journal:  Reprod Sci       Date:  2022-08-08       Impact factor: 2.924

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.