IntroductionWhile 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.MethodsA 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.ResultsA 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.DiscussionWaiting 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.
Introduction and hypothesis:The current study aims to assess the continence rate of a "second primary" midurethral sling (MUS) in women with recurrent/persistent stress urinary incontinence (SUI) after sling excision compared to a historical cohort who underwent a repeat MUS.Methods: A retrospective cohort study of women who underwent excision of a primary MUS and placement of a "second primary" MUS from 2009-2016 compared to a historical cohort who underwent a repeat MUS from 2006-2009. The primary outcome was continence rate, defined as "not at all" or "somewhat" to Urogenital Distress Inventory (UDI-6) SUI subscale questions. Secondary outcomes included assessment of symptom severity (UDI-6), symptom specific quality of life, Incontinence Impact Questionnaire (IIQ-7), Medical and Epidemiologic Aspects of Aging (MESA), and Patient Global Impression of Improvement (PGI-I).Results: Survey responses were available for 23/64 (36%) in the "second primary" MUS group versus 88/135 (65%) in the historical cohort. Mean follow-up in months, second primary: 41.8 ± 26.1 versus repeat: 36.2 ± 14.1, p=0.16 and age (years): 56.4 ± 10.7 versus 59.8 ± 10.8, p=0.19. Continence rates were 48% in "second primary" versus 56% in the repeat group (p=0.50). Both groups had significant improvement in questionnaire scores postoperatively with no intergroup
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.