RESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: This study compares surgical complications and patient outcomes between pelvic reconstructive surgery performed by an experienced surgeon (group 1) and those performed by resident physicians with the senior surgeon assisting and teaching (group 2). STUDY DESIGN: During a 5-year interval, 310 consecutive women underwent vaginal prolapse repair. Demographic, historic, and preoperative physical examination variables were compared. Intraoperative and postoperative outcomes were also compared. RESULTS: Patients operated on by the senior surgeon (Bob L. Shull) were thinner (group 1 vs group 2: 25.8 kg/m2 vs 27.1 kg/m2; P =.014), more often had prior prolapse or incontinence procedures (55% vs 33%; P <.001), and required shorter operating times (124 minutes vs 140 minutes; P =.002). The senior surgeon's patients differed from the resident physicians' patients with regard to stage of pelvic organ prolapse. No differences were observed for patient age (P =.51), estimated blood loss (P =.50), urologic complications (P =.59), and hospital stay (P =.25). The durability of the repairs was not different between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: We have demonstrated that in a tertiary referral practice resident surgeons can be taught to perform complex vaginal surgery with the only observed disadvantage being a slightly prolonged operative time.
