Environmental sustainability and gynaecological surgery: Which factors influence behaviour? An interview study.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the various factors that influence environmentally sustainable behaviour in gynaecological surgery and examine the differences between gynaecologists and residents. DESIGN: An interview study. SETTING: Academic and non-academic hospitals in the Netherlands. POPULATION: Gynaecologists (n = 10) and residents (n = 6). METHODS: Thematic analysis of semi-structured interviews to determine the various factors that influence environmentally sustainable behaviour in gynaecological surgery and to examine the differences between gynaecologists and residents. By using the Desmond framework and the COM-B BCW, both organisational and individual factors related to behaviour were considered. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Factors that influence environmentally sustainable behaviour. RESULTS: Awareness is increasing but practical knowledge is insufficient. It is crucial to integrate education on the environmental impact of everyday decisions for residents and gynaecologists. Gynaecologists make their own choices but residents' autonomy is limited. There is the necessity to provide environmentally sustainable surgical equipment without compromising other standards. There is a need for a societal change that encourages safe and open communication about environmental sustainability. To transition to environmentally sustainable practices, leadership, time, collaboration with the industry and supportive regulatory changes are essential. CONCLUSION: This study lays the groundwork for promoting more environmentally sustainable behaviour in gynaecological surgery. The key recommendations, addressing hospital regulations, leadership, policy revisions, collaboration with the industry, guideline development and education, offer practical steps towards a more sustainable healthcare system. Encouraging environmentally sustainable practices should be embraced to enhance the well-being of both our planet and our population, driving us closer to a more environmentally sustainable future in healthcare.

User experience of wearing comfort of reusable versus disposable surgical gowns and environmental perspectives: A cross-sectional survey.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the user experience of wearing comfort of reusable sterile surgical gowns and compare these gowns with conventional disposable surgical gowns. DESIGN: Cross-sectional survey. SETTING: An academic hospital in the Netherlands. POPULATION: Gynaecologists, surgeons, residents and operating room assistants (n=80). METHODS: Quantitative and qualitative data were obtained via a written questionnaire. Participants provided subjective comments and scored the reusable gown on each individual topic with a score from 1 to 5 (1 = unsatisfactory, 2 = moderate, 3 = good, 4 = very good, 5 = excellent) and compared the reusable gown with the conventional disposable alternative (better, equal or worse). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Wearing comfort: ventilation and temperature regulation, fit and length, functionality, barrier function and ease of use. RESULTS: The results of the overall scores of the reusable gown are scored as 'very good' (mean 4.3, SD ± 0.5) by its users. Regarding comparison of the gowns, more than 79% (lowest score 79%, highest score 95%) of the participants scored the reusable gown equal or higher on six of seven topics. The topic 'ease of use' was scored equal or higher by 59% of the participants. Subjective comments provided information on possible improvements. CONCLUSIONS: The findings of this study demonstrate that there is professional acceptance regarding the utilisation of reusable surgical gowns. To facilitate broader adoption, it is imperative to foster collaboration among suppliers and healthcare institutions. The reusable surgical gown is an environmentally sustainable, safe and comfortable alternative in the operating room.

Histological analysis of (antral) follicle density in ovarian cortex tissue attached to stripped endometriomas.

PURPOSE: When resecting endometriomas with the stripping technique, in the majority of cases, a thin line of adjacent ovarian cortex is attached to the endometrioma. In this study, we performed histological analysis to determine (antral) follicle density in the ovarian cortex tissue attached to stripped endometriomas and assessed patient- and surgical characteristics that could affect this. METHODS: Histological slides of previously removed endometriomas were assessed. Follicles in the attached ovarian tissue were classified according to maturation, and follicular density was determined. Immunofluorescent staining of antral follicles in a subset of endometriomas was also performed. RESULTS: In 90 out of 96 included endometriomas (93.7%), ovarian tissue attached to the cyst wall was observed. One thousand nine hundred forty-four follicles at different maturation stages were identified (3 follicles/mm3). Follicle density was negatively associated with age (p < 0.001). Antral follicles (< 7-mm diameter) were present in the ovarian tissue attached to 35 endometriomas (36.5%) derived from younger patients compared to endometriomas where none were detected (30 versus 35 years, p = 0.003). Antral follicle density was 1 follicle/mm3. Based on immunofluorescence, healthy antral follicles were identified in two out of four examined endometriomas. CONCLUSIONS: Ovarian tissue attached to stripped endometriomas holds potential as a non-invasive source for antral follicles. In theory, application of IVM could be an interesting alternative FP option in young patients with endometriomas who undergo cystectomy in order to transform the surgical collateral damage to a potential oocyte source. Our results encourage future research with fresh tissue to further assess the quality and potential of these follicles. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical Trials.gov Identifier: B21.055 (METC LDD), date of registration 12-08-2021, retrospectively registered.

Evaluation of the effect of previous endometriosis surgery on clinical and surgical outcomes of subsequent endometriosis surgery.

PURPOSE: Patients often undergo repeat surgery for endometriosis, due to recurrent or residual disease. Previous surgery is often considered a risk factor for worse surgical outcome. However, data are scarce concerning the influence of subsequent endometriosis surgery. METHODS: A retrospective study in a centre of expertise for endometriosis was conducted. All endometriosis subtypes and intra-operative steps were included. Detailed information regarding surgical history of patients was collected. Surgical time, intra-operative steps and major post-operative complications were obtained as outcome measures. RESULTS: 595 patients were included, of which 45.9% had previous endometriosis surgery. 7.9% had major post-operative complications and 4.4% intra-operative complications. The patient journey showed a median of 3 years between previous endometriosis surgeries. Each previous therapeutic laparotomic surgery resulted on average in 13 additional minutes (p = 0.013) of surgical time. Additionally, it resulted in more frequent performance of adhesiolysis (OR 2.96, p < 0.001) and in a higher risk for intra-operative complications (OR 1.81, p = 0.045), however no higher risk for major post-operative complications (OR 1.29, p = 0.418). Previous therapeutic laparoscopic endometriosis surgery, laparotomic and laparoscopic non-endometriosis surgery showed no association with surgical outcomes. Regardless of previous surgery, disc and segmental bowel resection showed a higher risk for major post-operative complications (OR 3.64, p = 0.017 respectively OR 3.50, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Previous therapeutic laparotomic endometriosis surgery shows an association with longer surgical time, the need to perform adhesiolysis, and more intra-operative complications in the subsequent surgery for endometriosis. However, in a centre of expertise with experienced surgeons, no increased risk of major post-operative complications was observed.

Operating Room Performance Optimization Metrics: a Systematic Review.

Literature proposes numerous initiatives for optimization of the Operating Room (OR). Despite multiple suggested strategies for the optimization of workflow on the OR, its patients and (medical) staff, no uniform description of 'optimization' has been adopted. This makes it difficult to evaluate the proposed optimization strategies. In particular, the metrics used to quantify OR performance are diverse so that assessing the impact of suggested approaches is complex or even impossible. To secure a higher implementation success rate of optimisation strategies in practice we believe OR optimisation and its quantification should be further investigated. We aim to provide an inventory of the metrics and methods used to optimise the OR by the means of a structured literature study. We observe that several aspects of OR performance are unaddressed in literature, and no studies account for possible interactions between metrics of quality and efficiency. We conclude that a systems approach is needed to align metrics across different elements of OR performance, and that the wellbeing of healthcare professionals is underrepresented in current optimisation approaches.

Potential Risk and Safety Measures in Laparoscopy in COVID-19 Positive Patients.

Background. During the COVID-19 pandemic the question arises if laparoscopy, as an aerosol forming procedure, poses a potential risk for viral transmission of SARS-CoV-2 to healthcare workers. Methods. A literature search was conducted using PubMed, Embase and MEDLINE. Articles reporting information regarding COVID-19 or other relevant viruses and laparoscopy, surgical smoke, aerosols and viral transmission were included. Results. Although aerosols produced during laparoscopy do not originate from the respiratory tract, the main transmission route of SARS-CoV-2, research did show SARS-CoV-2 to be present in other body fluids. The transmission risk via this route is however considered very low. As previous research showed potential viral transmission during laparoscopy for viruses that spread through contaminated body fluids, there might be a potential risk of SARS-CoV-2 transmission during laparoscopy, albeit considered very small. Conclusion. Due to the small risk compared to widely known benefits of laparoscopy, there is no reason to replace laparoscopy by laparotomy due to COVID-19 infection. To avoid the potential small risk of viral transmission, additional safety measures are advised.

Decline in surgeon volume after successful implementation of advanced laparoscopic surgery in gynecology: An undesired side effect?

INTRODUCTION: The implementation of advanced minimally invasive surgical (MIS) techniques has broadened. An extensive body of literature shows that high hospital and surgeon volumes lead to better patient outcomes. However, no information is available regarding volume trends in the post-implementation phase of MIS. This study investigated these trends and poses suggestions to adjust these developments. This knowledge can provide guidance to optimize patient safe performance of new surgical techniques. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A national retrospective cohort study in the Netherlands. The number of advanced laparoscopic (level 3 and 4) and robotic procedures and the number of gynecologists performing them were collected through a web-based questionnaire to determine hospital and gynecological surgeon volume. These volumes were compared with our previously collected data from 2012. RESULTS: The response rate was 85%. Hospitals produced larger volumes for advanced laparoscopic and robotic procedures. However, still 63% of the hospitals perform low-volume level 4 laparoscopic procedures. Additionally, gynecological surgeon volumes appeared to decrease for level 3 procedures, as the group of gynecologists performing fewer than 20 procedures expanded (64% vs. 44% in 2012), with 15% of the gynecologists performing fewer than ten procedures. Despite an increase in surgeon volumes for level 4 laparoscopy and robotic surgery, volumes continued to be low, as still 49% of gynecologists performed fewer than 10 level 4 procedures per year and 41% performed fewer than 20 robotic procedures per year. CONCLUSIONS: The broad implementation of advanced MIS procedures resulted in an increasing number of these procedures with increasing hospital volumes. However, as a side-effect, a disproportionate rise in number of gynecologists performing these procedures was observed. Therefore, surgeon volumes remain low and even decreased for some procedures. Centralization of complex procedures and training of specialized MIS gynecologists could improve surgeon volumes and therefore consequently enhance patient safety.

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

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the risk of uterine leiomyosarcoma in patients undergoing gynecological surgery and also to identify groups at risk for unrecognized uterine leiomyosarcoma. METHODS: A national cohort study was performed evaluating all uterine leiomyosarcoma (ULMS) diagnosed in The Netherlands between January 2000 and September 2015. Cases were identified and supplied by the nationwide network and registry of histo- and cytopathology in The Netherlands (PALGA). Unexpected and expected ULMS were compared. Approval for this study was granted by the Medical Ethics Committee of all participating hospitals and by the review board of PALGA. RESULTS: 262 original cases were included. The overall incidence of ULMS in our study was 0.25% or 1:400 patients. The incidence of unexpected ULMS was 0.12% or 1:865 patients. Preoperatively, a malignancy was unexpected in 46% of the cases and expected in 54%. Abnormal uterine bleeding constituted most of the symptoms. 90% of women underwent abdominal hysterectomy and/or bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy. CONCLUSIONS: Leiomyosarcoma are rare. Women aged 40-50 years with abnormal uterine bleeding are most at risk for unexpected ULMS. In contrast, this risk is low in postmenopausal women. ULMS were highly uncommon in women aged under 40 years.

Measuring surgical safety during minimally invasive surgical procedures: a validation study.

BACKGROUND: During the implementation of new interventions (i.e., surgical devices and technologies) in the operating room, surgical safety might be compromised. Current safety measures are insufficient in detecting safety hazards during this process. The aim of the study was to observe whether surgical teams are capable of measuring surgical safety, especially with regard to the introduction of new interventions. METHODS: A Surgical Safety Questionnaire was developed that had to be filled out directly postoperative by three surgical team members. A potential safety concern was defined as at least one answer between (strongly) disagree and indifferent. The validity of the questionnaire was assessed by comparison with the results from video analysis. Two different observers annotated the presence and effect of surgical flow disturbances during 40 laparoscopic hysterectomies performed between November 2010 and April 2012. RESULTS: The surgeon reported a potential safety concern in 16% (85/520 questions). With respect to the scrub nurse and anesthesiologist, this was both 9% (46/520). With respect to the preparation, functioning, and ease of use of the devices in 37.5-47.5% (15-19/40 procedures) a potential safety concern was reported by one or more team members. During procedures after which a potential safety concern was reported, surgical flow disturbances lasted a higher percentage of the procedure duration [9.3 ± 6.2 vs. 2.9 ± 3.7% (mean ± SD), p < .001]. After procedures during which a new instrument or device was used, more potential safety concerns were reported (51.2 vs. 23.1%, p < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Potential safety concerns were especially reported during procedures in which a relatively high percentage of the duration consisted of surgical flow disturbances and during procedures in which a new instrument or device was used. The Surgical Safety Questionnaire can act as a validated tool to evaluate and maintain surgical safety during minimally invasive procedures, especially during the introduction of a new intervention.

Towards spill-free in-bag morcellation: a health failure mode and effects analysis.

BACKGROUND: To assess potential risks of new surgical procedures and devices before their introduction into daily practice, a prospective risk inventory (PRI) is a required step. This study assesses the applicability of the Health Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (HFMEA) as part of a PRI of new technology in minimally invasive gynecologic surgery. METHODS: A reference case was defined of a patient with presumed benign leiomyoma undergoing a laparoscopic hysterectomy or myomectomy including in-bag power morcellation; however, pathology defined a stage I uterine leiomyosarcoma. Using in-bag morcellation as a template, a HFMEA was performed. All steps of the in-bag morcellation technique were identified. Next, the possible hazards of these steps were explored and possible measures to control these hazards were discussed. RESULTS: Five main steps of the morcellation process were identified. For retrieval bags without openings to accommodate instruments inside the bag, 120 risks were identified. Of these risks, 67 should be eliminated. For containment bags with openings 131 risks were identified of which 68 should be eliminated. Of the 10 causes most at risk to cause spillage, two can be eliminated by using appropriate bag materials. Myomectomy appears to be more at risk for residual tissue spillage compared to total hysterectomy. CONCLUSION: The HFMEA has provided important new insights regarding potential weaknesses of the in-bag morcellation technique, particularly with respect to hazardous steps in the morcellation process as well as requirements that bags should meet. As such, this study has shown HFMEA to be a valuable method that identifies and quantifies potential hazards of new technology.

Urinary catheterisation management after laparoscopic hysterectomy: a national overview and a nurse preference survey.

The aim of this study was to evaluate the catheterisation regimes after a laparoscopic hysterectomy (LH) in Dutch hospitals and to assess the nurses' opinion on this topic. This was particularly relevant as no consensus exists on the best moment to remove a urinary catheter after an LH. All 89 Dutch hospitals were successfully contacted and provided information on their catheterisation regime after LH: 69 (77.5%) hospitals reported removing the catheter the next morning after the LH, while nine hospitals (10.1%) removed it directly at the end of the procedure. The other 11 hospitals had different policies (four hours, up to two days). Additionally, all nurses working in the gynaecology departments of the hospitals affiliated to Leiden University were asked to fill in a self-developed questionnaire. Of the 111 nurses who completed the questionnaire (response rate 81%), 90% was convinced that a direct removal was feasible and 78% would recommend it to a family member or friend. Impact Statement What is already known on this subject? Although an indwelling catheter is routinely placed during a hysterectomy, it is unclear what the best moment is to remove it after an LH specifically. To fully benefit from the advantages associated with this minimally invasive approach, postoperative catheter management, should be, amongst others, optimal and LH-specific. A few studies have demonstrated that the direct removal of urinary catheter after an uncomplicated LH is feasible, but the evidence is limited. What the results of this study add? While waiting for the results of the randomised trials, this present study provides insight into the nationwide catheterisation management after an LH. Despite the lack of consensus on the topic, catheterisation management was quite uniform in the Netherlands: most Dutch hospitals removed the urinary catheter one day after an LH. Yet, this was not in line with the opinion of the surveyed nurses, as the majority would recommend a direct removal. This is interesting as nurses are closely involved in the patients' postoperative care. What are the implications of these findings for clinical practice and/or further research? Although randomised trials are necessary to determine an optimal catheterisation management, the findings of this present study are valuable if a new urinary catheter regime has to be implemented.

Prevalence of Musculoskeletal Disorders Among Surgeons Performing Minimally Invasive Surgery: A Systematic Review.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to review musculoskeletal disorder (MSD) prevalence among surgeons performing minimally invasive surgery. BACKGROUND: Advancements in laparoscopic surgery have primarily focused on enhancing patient benefits. However, compared with open surgery, laparoscopic surgery imposes greater ergonomic constraints on surgeons. Recent reports indicate a 73% to 88% prevalence of physical complaints among laparoscopic surgeons, which is greater than in the general working population, supporting the need to address the surgeons' physical health. METHODS: To summarize the prevalence of MSDs among surgeons performing laparoscopic surgery, we performed a systematic review of studies addressing physical ergonomics as a determinant, and reporting MSD prevalence. On April 15 2016, we searched Pubmed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, Web of Science, CINAHL, and PsychINFO. Meta-analyses were performed using the Hartung-Knapp-Sidik-Jonkman method. RESULTS: We identified 35 articles, including 7112 respondents. The weighted average prevalence of complaints was 74% [95% confidence interval (95% CI) 65-83]. We found high inconsistency across study results (I = 98.3%) and the overall response rate was low. If all nonresponders were without complaints, the prevalence would be 22% (95% CI 16-30). CONCLUSIONS: From the available literature, we found a 74% prevalence of physical complaints among laparoscopic surgeons. However, the low response rates and the high inconsistency across studies leave some uncertainty, suggesting an actual prevalence of between 22% and 74%. Fatigue and MSDs impact psychomotor performance; therefore, these results warrant further investigation. Continuous changes are enacted to increase patient safety and surgical care quality, and should also include efforts to improve surgeons' well-being.

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

BACKGROUND: The success of newly introduced surgical techniques is generally primarily assessed by surgical outcome measures. However, data on medical liability should concomitantly be used to evaluate provided care as they give a unique insight into substandard care from patient's point of view. The aim of this study was to analyze the number and type of medical claims after laparoscopic gynecologic procedures since the introduction of advanced laparoscopy two decades ago. Secondly, our objective was to identify trends and/or risk factors associated with these claims. METHODS: To identify the claims, we searched the databases of the two largest medical liability mutual insurance companies in The Netherlands (MediRisk and Centramed), covering together 96% of the Dutch hospitals. All claims related to laparoscopic gynecologic surgery and filed between 1993 and 2015 were included. RESULTS: A total of 133 claims met our inclusion criteria, of which 54 were accepted claims (41%) and 79 rejected (59%). The number of claims remained relatively constant over time. The majority of claims were filed for visceral and/or vascular injuries (82%), specifically to the bowel (40%) and ureters (20%). More than one-third of the injuries were entry related (38%) and 77% of the claims were filed after non-advanced procedures. A delay in diagnosing injuries was the primary reason for financial compensation (33%). The median sum paid to patients was €12,000 (500-848,689). In 90 claims, an attorney was defending the patient (83% for the accepted claims; 57% for the rejected claims). CONCLUSION: The number of claims remained relatively constant during the study period. Most claims were provoked by bowel and ureter injuries. Delay in recognizing injuries was the most encountered reason for granting financial compensation. Entering the abdominal cavity during laparoscopy continues to be a potential dangerous step. As a result, gynecologists are recommended to thoroughly counsel patients undergoing any laparoscopic procedure, even regarding the risk of entry-related injuries.

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

BACKGROUND: Since the introduction of minimally invasive surgery (MIS), concerns for patient safety are more often brought to the attention. Knowledge about and awareness of patient safety risk factors are crucial in order to improve and enhance the surgical team, the environment, and finally surgical performance. The aim of this study was to identify and quantify patient safety risk factors in laparoscopic hysterectomy and to determine their influence on surgical outcomes. METHODS: A prospective multicenter study was conducted from April 2014 to January 2016, participating gynecologists registered their performed laparoscopic hysterectomies (LHs). If deemed necessary, gynecologists could fill out a checklist with validated patient safety risk factors. Association between procedures with and without an occurred risk factor(s) and the surgical outcomes (blood loss, operative time, and complications) were assessed, using multivariate logistic regression and generalized estimation equations. RESULTS: Eighty-five gynecologists participated in the study, registering a total of 2237 LHs. For 627(28 %) procedures, the checklist was entered (in total 920 items). The most reported risk factors were related to the surgeon (19.6 %), the surgical team (14.4 %), technology (16.6 %), and the patient (26.8 %). The procedures where a risk factor was registered had significantly less favorable outcomes, higher complication rate (10.5 vs. 4.8 % (p = 0.002), longer operative time [114 vs. 95 min (p < 0.001)], and more blood loss [110 vs. 168 mL (p = 0.047)], which was mainly due to the technological and patient-related risk factors. CONCLUSION: Technological incidents are the most important and clinically relevant risk factors affecting surgical outcomes of LH. Future improvements of MIS need to focus on this. As awareness of safety risk factors in MIS is important, embedding of a safety risk factor checklist in registration systems will help surgeons to evaluate and improve their individual performance. This will inherently improve the surgical outcomes and thus patient safety.

Surgical flow disturbances in dedicated minimally invasive surgery suites: an observational study to assess its supposed superiority over conventional suites.

BACKGROUND: Minimally invasive surgery (MIS) is frequently compromised by surgical flow disturbances due to technology- and equipment-related failures. Compared with MIS in a conventional cart-based OR, performing MIS in a dedicated integrated operating room (OR) is supposed to be beneficial to patient safety. The aim of this study was to compare a conventional OR with an integrated OR with regard to the incidence and effect of equipment-related surgical flow disturbances during an advanced laparoscopic gynecological procedure [laparoscopic hysterectomy (LH)]. METHODS: Using video recording, 40 LHs performed between November 2010 and April 2012 (20 in a conventional cart-based OR and 20 in an integrated OR) were analyzed by two different observers. Outcome measures were the number, duration and effect (on a seven-point ordinal scale) of the surgical flow disturbances (e.g., malfunctioning, intraoperative repositioning, setup device). RESULTS: A total of 103 h and 45 min was observed. The interobserver agreement was high (kappa .85, p < .001). Procedure time was not significantly different (NS) [conventional OR vs. integrated OR, minutes ± standard deviation (SD), mean 161 ± 27 vs. 150 ± 34]. A total of 1651 surgical flow disturbances were observed (mean ± SD per procedure 40.8 ± 19.4 vs. 41.8 ± 15.9, NS). The mean number of surgical flow disturbances per procedure with regard to equipment was 6.3 ± 3.7 versus 8.5 ± 4.0, NS. No clinically relevant differences in the mean effect of these disturbances on the surgical flow between the two OR setups were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Performing LH in an integrated OR did not reduce the number of surgical flow disturbances nor the effect of these disturbances. Furthermore, in the integrated OR, repositioning of the monitors was a frequent and time-consuming source of disturbance. In order to maintain the high standard of surgical safety, the entire surgical team has to be aware that by performing surgery in an integrated OR different potential source for disruption arise.

Total Laparoscopic Hysterectomy Versus Vaginal Hysterectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Hysterectomies performed laparoscopically have greatly increased within the last few decades and even exceed the number of vaginal hysterectomies (VHs). This systematic review, conducted according to the Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology guidelines, compares surgical outcomes of total laparoscopic hysterectomy (TLH) and VH to evaluate which approach offers the most benefits. A literature search was performed in PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science for all relevant publications from January 2000 to February 2016. All randomized controlled trials and cohort studies for benign indication or low-grade malignancy comparing TLH with VH were considered for inclusion. From the literature search, 24 articles were found to be relevant and included in this review. The results of our meta-analysis showed no difference between the 2 groups for overall complications (OR 1.24 [.68, 2.28] for major complications; OR .83 [.53, 1.28] for minor complications), risk of ureter and bladder injuries (OR .81 [.34, 1.92]), intraoperative blood loss (mean difference [MD] -30 mL [-67.34, 7.60]), and length of hospital stay (-.61 days [-1.23, -.01]). VH was associated with a shorter operative time (MD 42 minute [29.34, 55.91]) and a lower rate of vaginal cuff dehiscence (OR 6.28 [2.38, 16.57]) and conversion to laparotomy (OR 3.89 [2.18, 6.95]). Although not significant, the costs of procedure were lower for VH (MD 3889.9 dollars [2120.3, 89 000]). Patients in the TLH group had lower postoperative visual analog scale scores (MD -1.08, [-1.74, -.42]) and required less analgesia during a shorter period of time (MD -.64 days, [-1.06, -.22]). Defining the best surgical approach is a dynamic process that requires frequent re-evaluation as techniques improve. Although TLH and VH result in similar outcomes, our meta-analysis showed that when both procedures are feasible, VH is currently still associated with greater benefits, such as shorter operative time, lower rate of vaginal dehiscence and conversion to laparotomy, and lower costs. Many factors influence the choice for surgical approach to hysterectomy, and shared decision-making is recommended.

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

PURPOSE: To assess the safety and effectiveness of LESS compared to conventional hysterectomy. METHODS: The systematic review and meta-analysis was performed according to the MOOSE guideline, and quality of evidence was assessed using GRADE. Different databases were searched up to 4th of August 2016. Randomized controlled trials and cohort studies comparing LESS to the conventional laparoscopic hysterectomy were considered for inclusion. RESULTS: Of the 668 unique articles, 23 were found relevant. We investigated safety by analyzing the complication rate and found no significant differences between both groups [OR 0.94 (0.61, 1.44), I 2 = 19%]. We assessed effectiveness by analyzing conversion risk, postoperative pain, and patient satisfaction. For conversion rates to laparotomy, no differences were identified [OR 1.60 (0.40, 6.38), I 2 = 45%]. In 3.5% of the cases in the LESS group, an additional port was needed during LESS. For postoperative pain scores and patient satisfaction, some of the included studies reported favorable results for LESS, but the clinical relevance was non-significant. Concerning secondary outcomes, only a difference in operative time was found in favor of the conventional group [MD 11.3 min (5.45-17.17), I 2 = 89%]. The quality of evidence for our primary outcomes was low or very low due to the study designs and lack of power for the specified outcomes. Therefore, caution is urged when interpreting the results. CONCLUSION: The single-port technique for benign hysterectomy is feasible, safe, and equally effective compared to the conventional technique. No clinically relevant advantages were identified, and as no data on cost effectiveness are available, there are currently not enough valid arguments to broadly implement LESS for hysterectomy.

Laparoscopic hysterectomy for benign indications: clinical practice guideline.

PURPOSE: Since the introduction of minimally invasive gynecologic surgery, the percentage of advanced laparoscopic procedures has greatly increased worldwide. It seems therefore, timely to standardize laparoscopic gynecologic care according to the principles of evidence-based medicine. With this goal in mind-the Dutch Society of Gynecological Endoscopic Surgery initiated in The Netherlands the development of a national guideline for laparoscopic hysterectomy (LH). This present article provides a summary of the main recommendations of the guideline. METHODS: This guideline was developed following the Dutch guideline of medical specialists and in accordance with the AGREE II tool. Clinically important issues were firstly defined and translated into research questions. A literature search per topic was then conducted to identify relevant articles. The quality of the evidence of these articles was rated following the GRADE systematic. An expert panel consisting of 18 selected gynecologists was consulted to formulate best practice recommendations for each topic. RESULTS: Ten topics were considered in this guideline, including amongst others, the different approaches for hysterectomy, advice regarding tissue extraction, pre-operative medical treatment and prevention of ureter injury. This work resulted in the development of a clinical practical guideline of LH with evidence- and expert-based recommendations. The guideline is currently being implemented in The Netherlands. CONCLUSION: A guideline for LH was developed. It gives an overview of best clinical practice recommendations. It serves to standardize care, provides guidance for daily practice and aims to guarantee the quality of LH at an (inter)national level.

Hospital versus individual surgeon's performance in laparoscopic hysterectomy.

PURPOSE: To compare hospital versus individual surgeon's perioperative outcomes for laparoscopic hysterectomy (LH), and to assess the relationship between surgeon experience and perioperative outcomes. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of all prospective collected LHs performed from 2003 to 2010 at one medical center was performed. Perioperative outcomes (operative time, blood loss, complication rate) were assessed on both a hospital level and surgeon level using Cumulative Observed minus Expected performance graphs. RESULTS: A total of 1618 LHs were performed, 16 % total laparoscopic hysterectomies and 84 % laparoscopic supracervical hysterectomies. Overall outcomes included mean (SD±) blood loss 108.9 ± 69.2 mL, mean operative time 95.4 ± 39.7 min and a complication occurred in 76 (4.7 %) of cases. Suboptimal perioperative outcomes of an individual surgeon were not always detected on a hospital level. However, collective suboptimal outcomes were faster detected on a hospital level compared to individual surgeon's level. Evidence of a learning curve is seen; for the first 100 procedures, a decrease in operative time is observed as individual surgeon experience increases. Similarly, the risk of conversion decreases up to the first 50 procedures. CONCLUSION: An individual outlier (i.e., surgeon with consistently suboptimal performance) will not always be detected when monitoring outcome measures only on a hospital level. However, monitoring outcome measures on a hospital level will detect suboptimal performance earlier compared to monitoring only on an individual surgeon's level. To detect performance outliers timely, insight into an individual surgeon's outcome and skills is recommended. Furthermore, an experienced surgeon is no guarantee for acceptable surgical outcomes.

A dynamic quality assessment tool for laparoscopic hysterectomy to measure surgical outcomes.

BACKGROUND: The current healthcare system has an urgent need for tools to measure quality. A wide range of quality indicators have been developed in an attempt to differentiate between high-quality and low-quality healthcare processes. However, one of the main issues of currently used indicators is the lack of case-mix correction and improvement possibilities. Case-mix is defined as specific (patient) characteristics that are known to potentially affect (surgical) outcome. If these characteristics are not taken into consideration, comparisons of outcome among healthcare providers may not be valid OBJECTIVE: To develop and test a quality assessment tool for laparoscopic hysterectomy, which can serve as a new outcome quality indicator STUDY DESIGN: This is a prospective international multicenter implementation study. A web-based application (.www.qusum.org) was developed with three main goals: to measure the surgeon's performance using three primary outcomes (blood loss, operative time, and complications); to provide immediate individual feedback using cumulative Observed-minus-Expected graphs; and to detect consistently suboptimal performance after correcting for case-mix characteristics. All gynecologists who perform laparoscopic hysterectomies were requested to register their procedures in the application. A patient safety risk factor checklist was used by the surgeon for reflection. Thereafter, a prospective implementation study was performed, and the application was tested using a survey that included the System Usability Scale. RESULTS: A total of 2066 laparoscopic hysterectomies were registered by 81 gynecologists. Mean operative time was 100±39 minutes, blood loss 127±163ml, and the complication rate 6.1%. The overall survey response rate was 75%, and the mean System Usability Scale was 76.5±13.6, which indicates that the application was good to excellent. The majority of surgeons reported that the application made them more aware of their performance, the outcomes, and patient safety, and they noted that the application provided motivation for improving future performance. CONCLUSIONS: We report the development and test of a real-time, dynamic quality assessment tool for measuring individual surgical outcome for laparoscopic hysterectomy. Importantly, this tool provides opportunities for improving surgical performance. Our study provides a foundation for helping clinicians develop evidence-based quality indicators for other surgical procedures.