International journal of gynecological cancer : official journal of the International Gynecological Cancer Society · 2019
Timing of robotic hysterectomy after cervical excisional procedure.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Melnikoff Anna K, Doo David W, Cohen Alexander C, Landers Emily, Walters-Haygood Christen, McGwin Gerald, Straughn J Michael, Kim Kenneth H
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: While traditional teaching has been to wait 6 weeks between cervical excisional procedure and hysterectomy, studies have produced conflicting evidence, with data supporting a delay of anywhere between 48 hours to 6 weeks depending on surgical approach. Our study sought to evaluate if the time between cervical excisional procedure and robotic hysterectomy impacts peri-operative complication rates.
METHODS: A retrospective cohort of patients who underwent robotic hysterectomy from August 2006 to December 2013 for cervical dysplasia or International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) 2009 stage IA1-B1 cervical cancer at a single tertiary care center was performed. Patients were categorized into three groups: early surgical intervention (<6 weeks from excisional procedure), delayed surgical intervention (≥6 weeks from excisional procedure), and no excisional procedure. Secondary analysis was performed by hysterectomy type (simple vs radical). Peri-operative outcomes and complications were compared. Statistical analysis included Chi-square, Fisher's exact test, and Wilcoxon rank sum test.
RESULTS: A total of 160 patients were identified. Of these, 32 (20.0%) had early surgical intervention, 52 (32.5%) had delayed surgical intervention, and 76 (47.5%) had no excisional procedure. There was no difference between groups in complication rates, including average estimated blood loss (82 vs 55 vs 71 mL; p=0.07), urologic injury (0% in all groups; p=1.0), anemia (3% vs 0% vs 1%; p=0.47), infection (0% vs 2% vs 3%; p=1.0), vaginal cuff separation (0% in all groups; p=1.0), or venous thromboembolism (0% vs 0% vs 1%; p=1.0). Additionally, there were no differences in length of stay (p=0.18) or 30-day readmission rates (p=1.0). Finally, there were no significant differences in peri-operative outcomes when stratified by radical versus simple hysterectomy.
DISCUSSION: Waiting 6 weeks between cervical excisional procedure and robotic hysterectomy does not impact peri-operative complication rates. This suggests that the time from excisional procedure should not factor into surgical planning for those who undergo robotic hysterectomy.
METHODS: A retrospective cohort of patients who underwent robotic hysterectomy from August 2006 to December 2013 for cervical dysplasia or International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) 2009 stage IA1-B1 cervical cancer at a single tertiary care center was performed. Patients were categorized into three groups: early surgical intervention (<6 weeks from excisional procedure), delayed surgical intervention (≥6 weeks from excisional procedure), and no excisional procedure. Secondary analysis was performed by hysterectomy type (simple vs radical). Peri-operative outcomes and complications were compared. Statistical analysis included Chi-square, Fisher's exact test, and Wilcoxon rank sum test.
RESULTS: A total of 160 patients were identified. Of these, 32 (20.0%) had early surgical intervention, 52 (32.5%) had delayed surgical intervention, and 76 (47.5%) had no excisional procedure. There was no difference between groups in complication rates, including average estimated blood loss (82 vs 55 vs 71 mL; p=0.07), urologic injury (0% in all groups; p=1.0), anemia (3% vs 0% vs 1%; p=0.47), infection (0% vs 2% vs 3%; p=1.0), vaginal cuff separation (0% in all groups; p=1.0), or venous thromboembolism (0% vs 0% vs 1%; p=1.0). Additionally, there were no differences in length of stay (p=0.18) or 30-day readmission rates (p=1.0). Finally, there were no significant differences in peri-operative outcomes when stratified by radical versus simple hysterectomy.
DISCUSSION: Waiting 6 weeks between cervical excisional procedure and robotic hysterectomy does not impact peri-operative complication rates. This suggests that the time from excisional procedure should not factor into surgical planning for those who undergo robotic hysterectomy.