Case log trends of urogynecology and reconstructive pelvic surgery fellows: A comparison of urology- and gynecology-based fellowship programs.

Abstract

Aims: Urogynecology and Reconstructive Pelvic Surgery (URPS) fellowship can be pursued after completion of either a urology (URO) or obstetrics and gynecology (GYN) residency. Our aim is to determine differences in graduating fellow cohort (GFC) case logs between URO- and GYN-based URPS programs.

Methods: Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education case logs for URPS GFCs in both GYN- and URO-based programs were analyzed for the 2019-2023 academic years (AY). Unpaired t-tests with Welch's correction were used to compare annual mean logged cases between URO- versus GYN-based GFCs for select surgical categories and the top 11 most logged index cases.

Results: GYN-based GFCs logged more cases for all pelvic organ prolapse (POP) categories including surgery on apical POP, anterior wall POP, and posterior wall POP (all p < 0.01), while URO-based GFCs logged more cases for surgery on the urinary system (p = 0.03). For the top 11 logged procedures, URO-based GFCs logged more sacral neuromodulation cases (p = 0.02), whereas GYN-based GFCs logged more slings, vaginal hysterectomies, minimally-invasive hysterectomies, vaginal apical POP, vaginal posterior POP, vaginal anterior POP, and minimally-invasive apical POP cases (all p < 0.01). There was no difference between URO- and GYN-based GFCs for complex urodynamics, cystoscopy with botox injection, or periurethral injection cases.

Conclusions: URO-based URPS fellows tend to graduate with more surgery on the urinary system and sacral neuromodulation cases, while GYN-based fellows perform more slings, hysterectomies, and POP surgery. These findings may help fellowships better understand potential differences in training among graduates from URO- and GYN-based programs and encourage collaboration to lessen these discrepancies.