RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Ureteral injury is a known complication of hysterectomies. Recent studies have attempted to correlate surgeon volume and experience with incidence of urinary tract injuries during hysterectomies. Some studies have reported that as surgeon volume increases, urinary tract injury rates decrease. To our knowledge, no studies have assessed the relationship between surgeon subspecialty and the rate of urinary tract injury rates during minimally invasive hysterectomy. AIM: To determine the incidence of urinary tract injury between urogynecologists, gynecologic oncologists, and general gynecologists. METHODS: The study took place from January 1, 2016 to December 1, 2021 at a large community hospital in Detroit, Michigan. We conducted a retrospective chart review of adult patients who underwent minimally invasive hysterectomy. After we identified eligible patients, the surgeon subspecialty was identified and the surgeon's volume per year was calculated. Patient demographics, medical history, physician-dictated operative reports, and all hospital visits postoperatively were reviewed. RESULTS: Urologic injury occurred in four patients (2%) in the general gynecologist group, in one patient (1%) in the gynecologic oncologist group, and in one patient (1%) in the urogynecologist group. When comparing high and low-volume surgeons, there was no statistically significant difference in urinary tract injury (1% vs 2%) or bowel injury (1% vs 0%). There were more complications in the low-volume group vs the high-volume group excluding urinary tract, bowel, or major vessel injury. High-volume surgeons had four (1%) patients with a complication and low-volume surgeons had 12 (4%) patients with a complication (P = 0.04). CONCLUSION: Our study demonstrated that there was no difference in the urinary tract injury rate in general gynecologists vs subspecialists, however our study was underpowered.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: It has been theorized that 75%-80% of febrile neutropenia (FN) is caused by endogenous pathogens, while up to 20% of cases are thought to be caused by a viral infection. It is unknown if precautions such as masking and social distancing reduce the risk of FN in susceptible populations. AIM: To determine whether coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection mitigation efforts, namely masking and social distancing, were associated with a reduction in the incidence of FN. METHODS: This was a retrospective population based cohort study comparing the incidence of FN in the 13 mo prior to (Year 0) and 13 mo following (Year 1) the public health executive orders (PHEO) in Michigan. Data was queried for all emergency department (ED) visits from April 1, 2019 to March 31, 2021 from the National Syndromic Surveillance Program, a program which collects data that is voluntarily submitted by approximately 89% of Michigan EDs. The primary study outcome was the incidence of FN as a proportion of ED visits in the 13-mo before and 13-mo after COVID-19 mitigations efforts, namely masking and social distancing. We hypothesized that there would be a significant decrease in the incidence of FN in the period following the PHEO aimed at reducing the spread of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 virus. RESULTS: There was a total of 8979221 total ED visits captured during the study period. In Year 0 there were 5073081 recorded ED visits and 3906140 in Year 1. There was a significant reduction in the proportion of total ED visits with a diagnosis of FN, decreasing 13.3% across periods (0.15% vs 0.13%, P = 0.036). In patients with a hematologic malignancy a more impressive reduction in the incidence of FN was evident following PHEO (22% vs 17%, P = 0.02). CONCLUSION: We found a significant association between social distancing and mask guidelines implemented on a large public scale with decreased rates of FN, particularly in those with a hematologic malignancy. These findings may be useful in the design of future research and recommendations regarding the prevention of FN.
RESUMO
The objective of this study was to evaluate the incidence of perioperative complications in robotic-assisted hysterectomies performed by high-volume robotic surgeons compared to conventional laparoscopic hysterectomies performed by all gynecologic surgeons. This retrospective cohort study was performed at a single-center community based hospital and medical center. A total of 332 patients who underwent hysterectomy for benign indications were included in this study. Half of these patients (n = 166) underwent conventional laparoscopic hysterectomy and the other half underwent a robotic-assisted laparoscopic hysterectomy. The main outcome measures included composite complication rate, estimated blood loss (EBL), and hospital length of stay (LOS). Median (IQR) EBL was significantly lower for robotic hysterectomy [22.5 (30) mL] compared to laparoscopic hysterectomy [100 (150) mL, p < 0.0001]. LOS was significantly shorter for robotic hysterectomy (1.0 ± 0.2 day) compared to laparoscopic hysterectomy (1.2 ± 0.7 days, p = 0.04). Despite averaging 3.0 (IQR 1.0) concomitant procedures compared to 0 (IQR 1.0) for the conventional laparoscopic hysterectomies, the incidence of any type of complication was lower in the robotic hysterectomy group (2 vs. 6%, p = 0.05). Finally, in a logistic regression model controlling for multiple confounders, robotic-assisted hysterectomy was less likely to result in a perioperative complication compared to traditional laparoscopic hysterectomy [odds ratio (95% CI) = 0.2 (0.1, 0.90), p = 0.04]. In conclusion, robotic-assisted hysterectomy may reduce complications compared with conventional laparoscopic hysterectomy when performed by high volume surgeons, especially in the setting of other concomitant gynecologic surgeries.