Literature DB >> 31098703

Comparing benign laparoscopic and abdominal hysterectomy outcomes by time.

Samantha L Margulies1, Maria V Vargas2, Kathryn Denny3, Andrew D Sparks4, Cherie Q Marfori5, Gaby Moawad5, Richard L Amdur4.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: While laparoscopic hysterectomy has benefits compared to abdominal hysterectomy, the operative times are longer. Longer operative times have been associated with negative outcomes. This study's purpose was to elucidate if there is an operative time at which 30-day outcomes for laparoscopic hysterectomy become inferior to a more expeditiously completed abdominal hysterectomy.
METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study (Canadian Task Force classification II-2) using the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database to identify women undergoing hysterectomy for benign indications from 2010 to 2016 by current procedural terminology code. Hysterectomy cases were stratified by approach and 60-min intervals. 30-day post-operative outcomes were analyzed by operative time and approach.
RESULTS: 109,821 hysterectomies were included in our analysis, of which 66,560 (61%) were laparoscopic, and 43,261 (39%) were abdominal. In a multivariable logistic regression analysis comparing outcomes by surgical approach and operative time, there was no time combination in which patients who had a abdominal hysterectomy had significantly lower odds of the composite complications variable. This was true even in laparoscopic hysterectomies greater than 240 min compared to abdominal hysterectomies completed between 20 and 60 min. When compared to laparoscopic hysterectomies greater than 240 min, abdominal hysterectomies between 20 and 60 min had lower odds of sepsis and abdominal hysterectomies less than 180 min had lower odds of urinary tract infection.
CONCLUSION: Given that benefits persist even in prolonged cases, a laparoscopic approach should be offered to most patients undergoing benign hysterectomy. Surgical efficiency should be prioritized for any surgical approach.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Hysterectomy; Laparoscopy; Minimally invasive surgery; Morbidity; Operative time; Surgical approach

Year:  2019        PMID: 31098703     DOI: 10.1007/s00464-019-06825-8

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Surg Endosc        ISSN: 0930-2794            Impact factor:   4.584


  24 in total

1.  Adverse events associated with laparoscopy vs laparotomy in the treatment of endometrial cancer.

Authors:  Jason C Barnett; Laura J Havrilesky; Amy E Bondurant; Nicole D Fleming; Paula S Lee; Angeles Alvarez Secord; Andrew Berchuck; Fidel A Valea
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2011-03-16       Impact factor: 8.661

2.  American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program Pediatric: a phase 1 report.

Authors:  Mehul V Raval; Peter W Dillon; Jennifer L Bruny; Clifford Y Ko; Bruce L Hall; R Lawrence Moss; Keith T Oldham; Karen E Richards; Charles D Vinocur; Moritz M Ziegler
Journal:  J Am Coll Surg       Date:  2010-10-29       Impact factor: 6.113

3.  Laparoscopic Versus Open Hysterectomy for Benign Disease in Uteri Weighing >1 kg: A Retrospective Analysis on 258 Patients.

Authors:  Stefano Uccella; Chiara Morosi; Nicola Marconi; Anna Arrigo; Baldo Gisone; Jvan Casarin; Ciro Pinelli; Camilla Borghi; Fabio Ghezzi
Journal:  J Minim Invasive Gynecol       Date:  2017-07-12       Impact factor: 4.137

Review 4.  Total abdominal hysterectomy versus total laparoscopic hysterectomy for benign disease: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Colin A Walsh; Stewart R Walsh; Tjun Y Tang; Mark Slack
Journal:  Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol       Date:  2009-03-25       Impact factor: 2.435

5.  Optimizing ACS NSQIP modeling for evaluation of surgical quality and risk: patient risk adjustment, procedure mix adjustment, shrinkage adjustment, and surgical focus.

Authors:  Mark E Cohen; Clifford Y Ko; Karl Y Bilimoria; Lynn Zhou; Kristopher Huffman; Xue Wang; Yaoming Liu; Kari Kraemer; Xiangju Meng; Ryan Merkow; Warren Chow; Brian Matel; Karen Richards; Amy J Hart; Justin B Dimick; Bruce L Hall
Journal:  J Am Coll Surg       Date:  2013-04-28       Impact factor: 6.113

6.  Longer Operative Time During Benign Laparoscopic and Robotic Hysterectomy Is Associated With Increased 30-Day Perioperative Complications.

Authors:  Tatiana Catanzarite; Sujata Saha; Matthew A Pilecki; John Y S Kim; Magdy P Milad
Journal:  J Minim Invasive Gynecol       Date:  2015-06-10       Impact factor: 4.137

7.  Total laparoscopic hysterectomy for very enlarged uteri.

Authors:  A Wattiez; D Soriano; A Fiaccavento; M Canis; R Botchorishvili; J Pouly; G Mage; M A Bruhat
Journal:  J Am Assoc Gynecol Laparosc       Date:  2002-05

8.  Nationwide trends in the performance of inpatient hysterectomy in the United States.

Authors:  Jason D Wright; Thomas J Herzog; Jennifer Tsui; Cande V Ananth; Sharyn N Lewin; Yu-Shiang Lu; Alfred I Neugut; Dawn L Hershman
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2013-08       Impact factor: 7.661

9.  Changes in Hysterectomy Trends After the Implementation of a Clinical Pathway.

Authors:  Amin Sanei-Moghaddam; Tianzhou Ma; Sharon L Goughnour; Robert P Edwards; Paula J Lounder; Naveed Ismail; John T Comerci; Suketu M Mansuria; Faina Linkov
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2016-01       Impact factor: 7.661

Review 10.  Robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery versus conventional laparoscopic surgery in randomized controlled trials: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Hyunsuk Frank Roh; Seung Hyuk Nam; Jung Mogg Kim
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-01-23       Impact factor: 3.240

View more
  2 in total

1.  A randomized, controlled trial comparing the clinical outcomes of 3D versus 2D laparoscopic hysterectomy.

Authors:  Taejong Song; Du-Young Kang
Journal:  Wideochir Inne Tech Maloinwazyjne       Date:  2021-04-30       Impact factor: 1.195

2.  Evaluation of the efficacy and safety of intradermal needle therapy on the sleep quality of patients following laparoscopic hysterectomy: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Guang-Lian He; Xiao-Zhen Gong; Jing-Ling He; Qing Yang; Jia-Yong Mai; Si-Ning Wu; Qing-Hua Guo
Journal:  Ann Transl Med       Date:  2022-07
  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.