Renal failure caused by severe pelvic organ prolapse.

Pelvic organ prolapse (POP), the transvaginal descent of pelvic organs, can cause mild hydronephrosis but rarely leads to a deterioration in kidney function. We present a case of severe uterovaginal prolapse that caused bilateral ureteral obstruction and led to renal failure and urinary tract infection. During outpatient follow-up, kidney function had already been deteriorating, but POP was not recognised as a causal factor. A longer duration of ureteral obstruction can lead to irreversible kidney damage, and therefore, timely recognition and intervention is of essence. Even in complex cases with various causative factors for kidney injury, the presence of severe POP and kidney injury should prompt the clinician to exclude this cause.

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.

Case-Mix Variables and Predictors for Outcomes of Laparoscopic Hysterectomy: A Systematic Review.

The assessment of surgical quality is complex, and an adequate case-mix correction is missing in currently applied quality indicators. The purpose of this study is to give an overview of all studies mentioning statistically significant associations between patient characteristics and surgical outcomes for laparoscopic hysterectomy (LH). Additionally, we identified a set of potential case-mix characteristics for LH. This systematic review was conducted according to the Meta-Analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology guidelines. We searched PubMed and EMBASE from January 1, 2000 to August 1, 2015. All articles describing statistically significant associations between patient characteristics and adverse outcomes of LH for benign indications were included. Primary outcomes were blood loss, operative time, conversion, and complications. The methodologic quality of the included studies was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale. The included articles were summed per predictor and surgical outcome. Three sets of case-mix characteristics were determined, stratified by different levels of evidence. Eighty-five of 1549 identified studies were considered eligible. Uterine weight and body mass index (BMI) were the most mentioned predictors (described, respectively, 83 and 45 times) in high quality studies. For longer operative time and higher blood loss, uterine weight ≥ 250 to 300 g and ≥500 g and BMI ≥ 30 kg/m(2) dominated as predictors. Previous operations, adhesions, and higher age were also considered as predictors for longer operative time. For complications and conversions, the patient characteristics varied widely, and uterine weight, BMI, previous operations, adhesions, and age predominated. Studies of high methodologic quality indicated uterine weight and BMI as relevant case-mix characteristics for all surgical outcomes. For future development of quality indicators of LH and to compare surgical outcomes adequately, a case-mix correction is suggested for at least uterine weight and BMI. A potential case-mix correction for adhesions and previous operations can be considered. For both surgeons and patients it is valuable to be aware of potential factors predicting adverse outcomes and to anticipate this. Finally, to benchmark clinical outcomes at an international level, it is of the utmost importance to introduce uniform outcome definitions.

Trocar types in laparoscopy.

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic surgery has led to great clinical improvements in many fields of surgery; however, it requires the use of trocars, which may lead to complications as well as postoperative pain. The complications include intra-abdominal vascular and visceral injury, trocar site bleeding, herniation and infection. Many of these are extremely rare, such as vascular and visceral injury, but may be life-threatening; therefore, it is important to determine how these types of complications may be prevented. It is hypothesised that trocar-related complications and pain may be attributable to certain types of trocars. This systematic review was designed to improve patient safety by determining which, if any, specific trocar types are less likely to result in complications and postoperative pain. OBJECTIVES: To analyse the rates of trocar-related complications and postoperative pain for different trocar types used in people undergoing laparoscopy, regardless of the condition. SEARCH METHODS: Two experienced librarians conducted a comprehensive search for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in the Menstrual Disorders and Subfertility Group Specialised Register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, CDSR and DARE (up to 26 May 2015). We checked trial registers and reference lists from trial and review articles, and approached content experts. SELECTION CRITERIA: RCTs that compared rates of trocar-related complications and postoperative pain for different trocar types used in people undergoing laparoscopy. The primary outcomes were major trocar-related complications, such as mortality, conversion due to any trocar-related adverse event, visceral injury, vascular injury and other injuries that required intensive care unit (ICU) management or a subsequent surgical, endoscopic or radiological intervention. Secondary outcomes were minor trocar-related complications and postoperative pain. We excluded trials that studied non-conventional laparoscopic incisions. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently conducted the study selection, risk of bias assessment and data extraction. We used GRADE to assess the overall quality of the evidence. We performed sensitivity analyses and investigation of heterogeneity, where possible. MAIN RESULTS: We included seven RCTs (654 participants). One RCT studied four different trocar types, while the remaining six RCTs studied two different types. The following trocar types were examined: radially expanding versus cutting (six studies; 604 participants), conical blunt-tipped versus cutting (two studies; 72 participants), radially expanding versus conical blunt-tipped (one study; 28 participants) and single-bladed versus pyramidal-bladed (one study; 28 participants). The evidence was very low quality: limitations were insufficient power, very serious imprecision and incomplete outcome data. Primary outcomesFour of the included studies reported on visceral and vascular injury (571 participants), which are two of our primary outcomes. These RCTs examined 473 participants where radially expanding versus cutting trocars were used. We found no evidence of a difference in the incidence of visceral (Peto odds ratio (OR) 0.95, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.06 to 15.32) and vascular injury (Peto OR 0.14, 95% CI 0.0 to 7.16), both very low quality evidence. However, the incidence of these types of injuries were extremely low (i.e. two cases of visceral and one case of vascular injury for all of the included studies). There were no cases of either visceral or vascular injury for any of the other trocar type comparisons. No studies reported on any other primary outcomes, such as mortality, conversion to laparotomy, intensive care admission or any re-intervention. Secondary outcomesFor trocar site bleeding, the use of radially expanding trocars was associated with a lower risk of trocar site bleeding compared to cutting trocars (Peto OR 0.28, 95% CI 0.14 to 0.54, five studies, 553 participants, very low quality evidence). This suggests that if the risk of trocar site bleeding with the use of cutting trocars is assumed to be 11.5%, the risk with the use of radially expanding trocars would be 3.5%. There was insufficient evidence to reach a conclusion regarding other trocar types, their related complications and postoperative pain, as no studies reported data suitable for analysis. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Data were lacking on the incidence of major trocar-related complications, such as visceral or vascular injury, when comparing different trocar types with one another. However, caution is urged when interpreting these results because the incidence of serious complications following the use of a trocar was extremely low. There was very low quality evidence for minor trocar-related complications suggesting that the use of radially expanding trocars compared to cutting trocars leads to reduced incidence of trocar site bleeding. These secondary outcomes are viewed to be of less clinical importance.Large, well-conducted observational studies are necessary to answer the questions addressed in this review because serious complications, such as visceral or vascular injury, are extremely rare. However, for other outcomes, such as trocar site herniation, bleeding or infection, large observational studies may be needed as well. In order to answer these questions, it is advisable to establish an international network for recording these types of complications following laparoscopic surgery.

Effectiveness and feasibility of hysteroscopic sterilization techniques: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To assess whether hysteroscopic sterilization is feasible and effective in preventing pregnancy. Secondarily, to identify risk factors for failure of hysteroscopic sterilization. DESIGN: A systematic review and meta-analysis. SETTING: Not applicable. PATIENT(S): Women undergoing hysteroscopic sterilization. INTERVENTION(S): Hysteroscopic sterilization with a commercially available system (Ovabloc Intra Tubal Device, Essure system, or Adiana permanent contraception system). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Successful placement at first attempt, confirmed correct placement, complications, incidence of pregnancy, and risk factors for placement failure in hysteroscopic sterilization. RESULT(S): Of the 429 citations identified, 45 articles were eligible for analyses. No randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were identified, just cohort studies. Six articles concerned Ovabloc, 37 Essure, and two Adiana sterilization. The probabilities for successful bilateral placement in a first attempt for Ovabloc, Essure, and Adiana, were, respectively, in the ranges 78%-84%, 81%-98%, and 94%. The probabilities of successful bilateral placement could not be pooled because of substantial heterogeneity. The 36 months' cumulative pregnancy rate of Adiana was 16 of 1,000. Reliable pregnancy rates after sterilization with Ovabloc or Essure method could not be calculated. For all three hysteroscopic techniques, the incidence of complications and their severity has not been studied adequately and remains unclear. We also found too little evidence to identify risk factors for placement failure. CONCLUSION(S): Sterilization by hysteroscopy seems feasible, but the effectiveness and risk factors for failure of sterilization remain unclear owing to the poor-quality evidence. Both currently applied hysteroscopic sterilization techniques and the coming new techniques must be evaluated properly for feasibility and effectiveness. Appropriate RCTs and observational studies with sufficient power and complete and long-term (>10 years) follow-up data on unintended pregnancies and complications are needed.

[Robotic surgery in the Netherlands: lack of high-quality proof of efficacy]. / Robotchirurgie in Nederland: hoogwaardig bewijs voor effectiviteit ontbreekt.

More than 10 years after its first introduction, robot-assisted surgery is now performed in 17 Dutch hospitals. Robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) is the most frequently performed, though its clinical superiority compared to open (RRP) and laparoscopic prostatectomy (LRP) has not been demonstrated. One randomized controlled trial showed better outcome in erectile function after RARP compared to LRP. The quality of the other studies into RARP is too limited to draw reliable conclusions on clinically relevant outcome measures such as survival, disease-free survival and quality of life. Given the high costs and small scientific evidence, the introduction of robotic surgery has been irresponsibly quick. Better scientific research of robotic surgery is needed before this technology can be broadly applied in clinical practice.

A multidisciplinary evidence-based guideline for minimally invasive surgery.: Part 1: entry techniques and the pneumoperitoneum.

The Dutch Society for Endoscopic Surgery together with the Dutch Society of Obstetrics and Gynecology initiated a multidisciplinary working group to develop a guideline on minimally invasive surgery to formulate multidisciplinary agreements for minimally invasive surgery aiming towards better patient care and safety. The guideline development group consisted of general surgeons, gynecologists, an anesthesiologist, and urologist authorized by their scientific professional association. Two advisors in evidence-based guideline development supported the group. The guideline was developed using the "Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation" instrument. Clinically important aspects were identified and discussed. The best available evidence on these aspects was gathered by systematic review. Recommendations for clinical practice were formulated based on the evidence and a consensus of expert opinion. The guideline was externally reviewed by members of the participating scientific associations and their feedback was integrated. Identified important topics were: laparoscopic entry techniques, intra-abdominal pressure, trocar use, electrosurgical techniques, prevention of trocar site herniation, patient positioning, anesthesiology, perioperative care, patient information, multidisciplinary user consultation, and complication registration. The text of each topic contains an introduction with an explanation of the problem and a summary of the current literature. Each topic was discussed, considerations were evaluated and recommendations were formulated. The development of a guideline on a multidisciplinary level facilitated a broad and rich discussion, which resulted in a very complete and implementable guideline.