Pain With Differing Insufflation Pressures During Robotic Sacrocolpopexy: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether decreasing insufflation pressure reduces postoperative pain and opioid use in women undergoing robotic-assisted sacrocolpopexy. METHODS: In a single-blinded randomized trial, women with pelvic organ prolapse underwent robotic-assisted sacrocolpopexy at either 12 mm Hg (experimental) or 15 mm Hg (standard) insufflation pressure. The primary outcome was pain rating on a visual analog scale (VAS) on postoperative day 1 within 24 hours of surgery. Secondary outcomes included VAS pain rating at outpatient follow-up, inpatient and outpatient use of opioids, operative time, and estimated blood loss. A margin of 15 mm was considered clinically different on the VAS, and at 80% power, a sample size of at least 64 participants was needed to show significance. RESULTS: From April 27, 2021, to May 17, 2022, 80 women were enrolled, with 41 in the experimental group and 39 in the standard group. All participants underwent surgery as planned and attended a 2-week postoperative follow-up. Participants in the experimental group had less pain on postoperative day 1 with median VAS of 17.0 mm (interquartile range 26.0) compared with 29.0 mm (interquartile range 32.0, P=.007) in the standard group. No differences were noted in the secondary outcomes of operative time, estimated blood loss, or length of stay. Participants in the experimental group were noted to use fewer opioids while an inpatient (P=.04) and outpatient (P=.02). In multivariable analyses, lower insufflation pressure and increasing age were negatively associated with postoperative VAS scores. CONCLUSION: Lowering insufflation pressure (12 mm Hg) during robotic-assisted sacrocolpopexy safely reduced postoperative pain and opioid use compared with standard pressure (15 mm Hg). CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinialTrials.gov, NCT04858438.

Urinary tract injury during hysterectomy: Does surgeon specialty and surgical volume matter?

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.