Preoperative pain measurements in correlation to deep endometriosis classification with Enzian

Background: Deep Endometriosis (DE) classification studies with Enzian never compared solitary compartments (A, B, C, F), and combinations of anatomical locations (A&B, A&C, B&C, A&B&C), in correlation to pain. Therefore, the results of these studies are challenging to translate to the clinical situation. Objectives: We studied pain symptoms and their correlation with the solitary and combinations of anatomical locations of deep endometriosis lesion(s) classified by the Enzian score. Materials and Methods: A prospective multi-centre study was conducted with data from university and non-university hospitals. A total of 419 surgical DE cases were collected with the web-based application called EQUSUM (www.equsum.org). Main Outcome Measures: Preoperative reported numeric rating scale (NRS) were collected along with the Enzian classification. Baseline characteristics, pain scores, surgical procedure and extent of the disease were also collected. Results: In general, more extensive involvement of DE does not lead to an increase in the numerical rating scale for pain measures. However, dysuria and bladder involvement do show a clear correlation AUC 0.62 (SE 0.04, CI 0.54-0.71, p< 0.01). Regarding the predictive value of dyschezia, we found a weak, but significant correlation with ureteric involvement; AUC 0.60 (SE 0.04, CI 0.53-0.67, p< 0.01). Conclusions: Pain symptoms poorly correlate with anatomical locations of deep endometriosis in almost all pain scores, with the exception of bladder involvement and dysuria which did show a correlation. Also, dyschezia seems to have predictive value for DE ureteric involvement and therefore MRI or ultrasound imaging (ureter and kidney) could be recommended in the preoperative workup of these patients. What's new?: Dyschezia might have a predictive value in detecting ureteric involvement.

EQUSUM: Endometriosis QUality and grading instrument for SUrgical performance: proof of concept study for automatic digital registration and classification scoring for r-ASRM, EFI and Enzian.

STUDY QUESTION: Is electronic digital classification/staging of endometriosis by the EQUSUM application more accurate in calculating the scores/stages and is it easier to use compared to non-digital classification? SUMMARY ANSWER: We developed the first digital visual classification system in endometriosis (EQUSUM). This merges the three currently most frequently used separate endometriosis classification/scoring systems (i.e. revised American Society for Reproductive Medicine (rASRM), Enzian and Endometriosis Fertility Index (EFI)) to allow uniform and adequate classification and registration, which is easy to use. The EQUSUM showed significant improvement in correctly classifying/scoring endometriosis and is more user-friendly compared to non-digital classification. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Endometriosis classification is complex and until better classification systems are developed and validated, ideally all women with endometriosis undergoing surgery should have a correct rASRM score and stage, while women with deep endometriosis (DE) should have an Enzian classification and if there is a fertility wish, the EFI score should be calculated. STUDY DESIGN SIZE DURATION: A prospective endometriosis classification proof of concept study under experts in deep endometriosis was conducted. A comparison was made between currently used non-digital classification formats for endometriosis versus a newly developed digital classification application (EQUSUM). PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS SETTING METHODS: A hypothetical operative endometriosis case was created and summarized in both non-digital and digital form. During European endometriosis expert meetings, 45 DE experts were randomly assigned to the classic group versus the digital group to provide a proper classification of this DE case. Each expert was asked to provide the rASRM score and stage, Enzian and EFI score. Twenty classic forms and 20 digital forms were analysed. Questions about the user-friendliness (system usability scale (SUS) and subjective mental effort questionnaire (SMEQ)) of both systems were collected. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: The rASRM stage was scored completely correctly by 10% of the experts in the classic group compared to 75% in the EQUSUM group (P < 0. 01). The rASRM numerical score was calculated correctly by none of the experts in the classic group compared with 70% in the EQUSUM group (P < 0.01). The Enzian score was correct in 60% of the classic group compared to 90% in the EQUSUM group (P = 0.03). EFI scores were calculated correctly in 25% of the classic group versus 85% in the EQUSUM group (P < 0.01). Finally, the usability measured with the SUS was significantly better in the EQUSUM group compared to the classic group: 80.8 ± 11.4 and 61.3 ± 20.5 (P < 0.01). Also the mental effort measured with the SMEQ was significant lower in the EQUSUM group compared to the classic group: 52.1 ± 18.7 and 71.0 ± 29.1 (P = 0.04). Future research should further develop and confirm these initial findings by conducting similar studies with larger study groups, to limit the possible role of chance. LIMITATIONS REASONS FOR CAUTION: These first results are promising, however it is important to note that this is a preliminary result of experts in DE and needs further testing in daily practice with different types (complex and easy) of endometriosis cases and less experienced gynaecologists in endometriosis surgery. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: This is the first time that the rASRM, Enzian and EFI are combined in one web-based application to simplify correct and automatic endometriosis classification/scoring and surgical registration through infographics. Collection of standardized data with the EQUSUM could improve endometriosis reporting and increase the uniformity of scientific output. However, this requires a broad implementation. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTERESTS: To launch the EQUSUM application, a one-time financial support was provided by Medtronic to cover the implementation cost. No competing interests were declared. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: N/A.

[Optimising postoperative recovery at home; individualised discharge policy and task division between GP and medical specialist]. / Optimaliseren van postoperatief herstel thuis.

In the last decennia, the length of hospital stay of admitted patients has significantly decreased in all medical fields. As a result, postoperative recovery mainly takes place at home, inherently leading to new challenges. Here, two patients are being discussed for whom the postoperative period was substandard. To guarantee optimal quality of care in the home situation, the medical specialist and the general practitioner need to make the necessary arrangements. We would first of all recommend providing each discharged patient with specific, structured and individualised advices regarding postoperative recovery but also regarding alarm symptoms and logistics (e.g. who to call in case of emergency). Finally, we believe that, as (serious) complications are rare, it should be agreed on the fact that the responsible medical specialist is the coordinator of the postoperative period and the first contact point for postoperative patients.

Intracorporeal knot tying in a box trainer: how proficient is in vitro evaluation in laparoscopic experts?

OBJECTIVE: To determine the applicability of motion analysis parameters of intracorporeal knot tying in box trainers in experts as predictors of surgical outcome. DESIGN: Consecutive series of 1534 advanced laparoscopic hysterectomies (Canadian Task Force classification II-2). INTERVENTION: Time, path length, and motion in depth of a standardized intracorporeal knot-tying task were compared with mean risk-adjusted primary clinical outcomes for each participant. RESULTS: Although a large variety in proficient knot tying and surgical skills factors was observed; after correction for patient mix in 50 expert surgeons, motion analysis of intracorporeal knot tying could not significantly determine surgical outcome skills in advanced laparoscopic surgery. CONCLUSION: Levels of proficiency in advanced laparoscopic surgery cannot be appropriately determined using motion analysis in box trainers. Therefore, box trainer assessments do not adequately differentiate proficient from suboptimal clinical performance.

Vaginal cuff dehiscence in laparoscopic hysterectomy: influence of various suturing methods of the vaginal vault.

Vaginal cuff dehiscence (VCD) is a severe adverse event and occurs more frequently after total laparoscopic hysterectomy (TLH) compared with abdominal and vaginal hysterectomy. The aim of this study is to compare the incidence of VCD after various suturing methods to close the vaginal vault. We conducted a retrospective cohort study. Patients who underwent TLH between January 2004 and May 2011 were enrolled. We compared the incidence of VCD after closure with transvaginal interrupted sutures versus laparoscopic interrupted sutures versus a laparoscopic single-layer running suture. The latter was either bidirectional barbed or a running vicryl suture with clips placed at each end commonly used in transanal endoscopic microsurgery. Three hundred thirty-one TLHs were included. In 75 (22.7 %), the vaginal vault was closed by transvaginal approach; in 90 (27.2 %), by laparoscopic interrupted sutures; and in 166 (50.2 %), by a laparoscopic running suture. Eight VCDs occurred: one (1.3 %) after transvaginal interrupted closure, three (3.3 %) after laparoscopic interrupted suturing and four (2.4 %) after a laparoscopic running suture was used (p = .707). With regard to the incidence of VCD, based on our data, neither a superiority of single-layer laparoscopic closure of the vaginal cuff with an unknotted running suture nor of the transvaginal and the laparoscopic interrupted suturing techniques could be demonstrated. We hypothesise that besides the suturing technique, other causes, such as the type and amount of coagulation used for colpotomy, may play a role in the increased risk of VCD after TLH.

Implementation of laparoscopic hysterectomy: maintenance of skills after a mentorship program.

BACKGROUND: To evaluate the implementation and maintenance of advanced laparoscopic skills after a structured mentorship program in laparoscopic hysterectomy (LH). METHODS: Cohort retrospective analysis of 104 successive LHs performed by two gynecologists during and after a mentorship program. LHs were compared for indication, patient characteristics and intraoperative characteristics. As a frame of reference, 94 LHs performed by the mentor were analyzed. RESULTS: With regard to indication, blood loss and adverse outcomes, both trainees performed LHs during their mentorship program comparable with the LHs performed by the mentor. The difference in mean operating time between trainees and mentor was not clinically significant. Both trainees progressed along a learning curve, while operating time remained statistically constant and comparable to that of the mentor. After completing the mentorship program, both gynecologists maintained their acquired skills as blood loss, adverse outcome rates and operating time were comparable with the results during their traineeship. CONCLUSION: A mentorship program is an effective and durable tool for implementing a new surgical procedure in a teaching hospital with respect to patient safety aspects, as indications, operating time and adverse outcome rates are comparable to those of the mentor in his own hospital during and after completing the mentorship program.

Implementation of advanced laparoscopic surgery in gynecology: national overview of trends.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To estimate the implementation of laparoscopic surgery in operative gynecology. DESIGN: Observational multicenter study (Canadian Task Force classification II-2). SETTING: All hospitals in the Netherlands. SAMPLE: Nationwide annual statistics for 2002 and 2007. INTERVENTIONS: A national survey of the number of performed laparoscopic and conventional procedures was performed. Laparoscopy was categorized for complexity in level 1, 2, and 3 procedures. Outcomes were compared with results from 2002 to evaluate trends. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: In 2002, 21 414 laparoscopic and 9325 conventional procedures were performed in 74 hospitals (response rate, 74%), and in 2007, 16 863 laparoscopic and 10 973 conventional procedures were performed in 80 hospitals (response rate, 80%). Compared with 2002, in 2007, level 1 procedures were performed significantly less often and level 2 and level 3 procedures were performed significantly more often. The mean number of performed laparoscopic procedures per hospital decreased from 289 to 211 procedures. Teaching hospitals performed more than twice as many therapeutic laparoscopic procedures as nonteaching hospitals do. Cystectomy, oophorectomy, and ectopic pregnancy surgery were preferably performed using the laparoscopic approach. Laparoscopic hysterectomy was performed significantly more often, accounting for 10% of all hysterectomies. Annually, 20% of hospitals in which laparoscopic hysterectomy was implemented performed 50% of all laparoscopic hysterectomies, and 50% of the hospitals performed 20% of laparoscopic hysterectomies. CONCLUSION: This study describes increasing implementation of therapeutic laparoscopic gynecologic surgery. Clinics increasingly opt to perform laparoscopic surgery rather than conventional surgery. However, implementation of advanced procedures such as laparoscopic hysterectomy seems to be hampered.

A novel approach to registration of adverse outcomes in obstetrics and gynaecology: a feasibility study.

OBJECTIVE: The central aim of this study was to assess the feasibility of the developed adverse outcome registration method. Furthermore, it was tested whether the information gathered through the registration system allowed for comparative analyses. DESIGN: Prospective observational multicentre study. SETTING: The obstetrics and gynaecology departments of three Dutch university and three general hospitals. Population Every consecutive admission to these departments during the 12-month study period. METHODS: All complications, during admission and up to 6 weeks after discharge, were registered using a standardised form. The complication type and origin were noted and the severity of the complications were graded. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The differences in relative frequencies of complications between the participating university and general hospitals. RESULTS: A total of 10 470 admissions were observed at the obstetrics and gynaecology departments of the six hospitals combined. The standard complication registration form was completed for approximately 90% of these admissions. A total of 351 gynaecological (9.1%) and 960 obstetrical (14.5%) complications were reported. There was no significant difference in the percentage of complications between general hospitals and university hospitals. The severity of complications, however, varied significantly between the participating hospitals. CONCLUSIONS: A feasible framework for complication registration in the field of obstetrics and gynaecology has been developed. Before comparing frequencies of adverse events between hospitals, such outcome measures first need to be risk-adjusted to overcome the problem of patient variation and acuity between hospitals as a source of difference, leaving quality of care as a primary source of variation.

Twenty-first century laparoscopic hysterectomy: should we not leave the vaginal step out?

The objective of this study was to compare surgical outcomes for laparoscopically assisted vaginal hysterectomy (LAVH) with total laparoscopic hysterectomy (TLH) in three teaching hospitals in the Netherlands. This study is a multicenter cohort retrospective analysis of consecutive cases (Canadian Task Force classification II-2). One hundred and four women underwent a laparoscopic hysterectomy between March 1995 and March 2005 at one of three teaching hospitals. This included 37 women who underwent LAVH and 67 who underwent TLH. Blood loss, operating time, and intraoperative complications such as bladder or ureteric injury as well as conversion to an open procedure were recorded. In the TLH group, average age was statistically significant lower, as well as the mean parity, whereas estimated uterus size was statistically significant larger, compared to the LAVH group. Main indication in both groups was dysfunctional uterine bleeding. In the TLH group, mean blood loss (173 mL) was significant lower compared to the LAVH group (457 mL), whereas length of surgery, uterus weight, and complication rates were comparable between the two groups. The method of choice at the start of the study period was LAVH, and by the end of the study period, it had been superceded by TLH. LAVH should not be regarded as the novice's laparoscopic hysterectomy. Moreover, with regard blood loss, TLH shows advantages above LAVH. This might be due to the influence of the altered anatomy in the vaginal stage of the LAVH procedure. Therefore, when a vaginal hysterectomy is contraindicated, TLH is the procedure of choice. LAVH remains indicated in case of vaginal hysterectomy with accompanying adnexal surgery.