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.

Surgical phase modelling in minimal invasive surgery.

BACKGROUND: Surgical Process Modelling (SPM) offers the possibility to automatically gain insight in the surgical workflow, with the potential to improve OR logistics and surgical care. Most studies have focussed on phase recognition modelling of the laparoscopic cholecystectomy, because of its standard and frequent execution. To demonstrate the broad applicability of SPM, more diverse and complex procedures need to be studied. The aim of this study is to investigate the accuracy in which we can recognise and extract surgical phases in laparoscopic hysterectomies (LHs) with inherent variability in procedure time. To show the applicability of the approach, the model was used to automatically predict surgical end-times. METHODS: A dataset of 40 video-recorded LHs was manually annotated for instrument use and divided into ten surgical phases. The use of instruments provided the feature input for building a Random Forest surgical phase recognition model that was trained to automatically recognise surgical phases. Tenfold cross-validation was performed to optimise the model for predicting the surgical end-time throughout the procedure. RESULTS: Average surgery time is 128 ± 27 min. Large variability within specific phases is seen. Overall, the Random Forest model reaches an accuracy of 77% recognising the current phase in the procedure. Six of the phases are predicted accurately over 80% of their duration. When predicting the surgical end-time, on average an error of 16 ± 13 min is reached throughout the procedure. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates an intra-operative approach to recognise surgical phases in 40 laparoscopic hysterectomy cases based on instrument usage data. The model is capable of automatic detection of surgical phases for generation of a solid prediction of the surgical end-time.

A new approach to simplify surgical colpotomy in laparoscopic hysterectomy.

New surgical techniques and technology have simplified laparoscopic hysterectomy and have enhanced the safety of this procedure. However, the surgical colpotomy step has not been addressed. This study evaluates the surgical colpotomy step in laparoscopic hysterectomy with respect to difficulty and duration. Furthermore, it proposes an alternative route that may simplify this step in laparoscopic hysterectomy. A structured interview, a prospective cohort study, and a problem analysis were performed regarding experienced difficulty and duration of surgical colpotomy in laparoscopic hysterectomy. Sixteen experts in minimally invasive gynecologic surgery from 12 hospitals participated in the structured interview using a 5-point Likert scale. The colpotomy in LH received the highest scores for complexity (2.8 ± 1.2), compared to AH and VH. Colpotomy in LH was estimated as more difficult than in AH (2.8 vs 1.4, p < .001). In the cohort study, 107 patients undergoing LH were included. Sixteen percent of the total procedure time was spent on colpotomy (SD 7.8 %). BMI was positively correlated with colpotomy time, even after correcting for longer operation time. No relation was found between colpotomy time and blood loss or uterine weight. The surgical colpotomy step in laparoscopic hysterectomy should be simplified as this study demonstrates that it is time consuming and is considered to be more difficult than in other hysterectomy procedures. A vaginal approach to the colpotomy is proposed to achieve this simplification.

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.