Current Methods of Tissue Extraction in Minimally Invasive Surgical Treatment of Uterine Fibroids.

IF 1.4 4区 医学 Q3 SURGERY
Renita Kim, Kristen Pepin, Monalisa Dmello, Nisse Clark, Mobolaji Ajao, Jon Einarsson, Sarah Cohen Rassier
{"title":"Current Methods of Tissue Extraction in Minimally Invasive Surgical Treatment of Uterine Fibroids.","authors":"Renita Kim,&nbsp;Kristen Pepin,&nbsp;Monalisa Dmello,&nbsp;Nisse Clark,&nbsp;Mobolaji Ajao,&nbsp;Jon Einarsson,&nbsp;Sarah Cohen Rassier","doi":"10.4293/JSLS.2022.00036","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and objectives: </strong>Since the 2014 Food and Drug Administration communication regarding the use of power morcellation, gynecologists have adopted alternative tissue extraction strategies. The objective of this study is to investigate the current techniques used by gynecologic surgeons for tissue extraction following minimally invasive hysterectomy or myomectomy for fibroids.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>An online survey was distributed to all AAGL members and responses were collected between March 26, 2019 and April 17, 2019.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Four hundred thirty-six respondents completed the survey. For hysterectomy, the most common methods of tissue extraction were manual morcellation through the colpotomy (72.4%) or minilaparotomy (66.9%). Nearly one-third (31.7%) endorsed using power morcellation. For myomectomy, manual morcellation via minilaparotomy (71.9%) was the most common approach, followed by power morcellation (35.7%). Use of containment bags was common. Minilaparotomy incisions were typically three cm and most often at the umbilicus.Geographic differences were detected, particularly with power morcellation. During hysterectomy, 18.4% of US-based surgeons reported its use, compared to 56.9% of nonUS-based surgeons. During myomectomy, 20.5% of US-based surgeons reported its use compared to 67.5% of their international counterparts. Age, years in practice, fellowship training, and practice location were all significantly associated with power morcellator use.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>A large majority of practitioners are performing manual morcellation through the colpotomy or minilaparotomy. Use of containment bags is common with all routes of tissue removal. Power morcellation use is less common in the United States than in other countries.</p>","PeriodicalId":17679,"journal":{"name":"JSLS : Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2022-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/f9/fe/e2022.00036.PMC9385112.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JSLS : Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4293/JSLS.2022.00036","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background and objectives: Since the 2014 Food and Drug Administration communication regarding the use of power morcellation, gynecologists have adopted alternative tissue extraction strategies. The objective of this study is to investigate the current techniques used by gynecologic surgeons for tissue extraction following minimally invasive hysterectomy or myomectomy for fibroids.

Methods: An online survey was distributed to all AAGL members and responses were collected between March 26, 2019 and April 17, 2019.

Results: Four hundred thirty-six respondents completed the survey. For hysterectomy, the most common methods of tissue extraction were manual morcellation through the colpotomy (72.4%) or minilaparotomy (66.9%). Nearly one-third (31.7%) endorsed using power morcellation. For myomectomy, manual morcellation via minilaparotomy (71.9%) was the most common approach, followed by power morcellation (35.7%). Use of containment bags was common. Minilaparotomy incisions were typically three cm and most often at the umbilicus.Geographic differences were detected, particularly with power morcellation. During hysterectomy, 18.4% of US-based surgeons reported its use, compared to 56.9% of nonUS-based surgeons. During myomectomy, 20.5% of US-based surgeons reported its use compared to 67.5% of their international counterparts. Age, years in practice, fellowship training, and practice location were all significantly associated with power morcellator use.

Conclusion: A large majority of practitioners are performing manual morcellation through the colpotomy or minilaparotomy. Use of containment bags is common with all routes of tissue removal. Power morcellation use is less common in the United States than in other countries.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

子宫肌瘤微创手术中组织提取方法的研究进展。
背景和目的:自2014年美国食品和药物管理局关于使用动力粉碎的沟通以来,妇科医生采用了替代的组织提取策略。本研究的目的是探讨目前妇科外科医生在微创子宫切除术或子宫肌瘤切除术后组织提取的技术。方法:于2019年3月26日至2019年4月17日对AAGL所有会员进行在线调查,收集回复。结果:436名受访者完成了调查。对于子宫切除术,最常见的组织提取方法是经阴道切开手工碎块(72.4%)或小切口(66.9%)。近三分之一(31.7%)的人支持使用功率粉碎。对于子宫肌瘤切除术,经小切口手工分碎术(71.9%)是最常见的方法,其次是强力分碎术(35.7%)。使用密封袋是很常见的。小开腹切口通常为3厘米,最常位于脐部。发现了地理差异,特别是功率分块。在子宫切除术中,18.4%的美国外科医生报告使用了它,而非美国外科医生的比例为56.9%。在子宫肌瘤切除术中,20.5%的美国外科医生报告使用它,而国际同行的比例为67.5%。年龄、实习年数、实习地点均与动力碎裂机的使用显著相关。结论:绝大多数从业人员通过阴道切开术或小切口切开术进行手工碎裂。使用密封袋是常见的所有组织移除方法。与其他国家相比,电力粉碎的使用在美国不太常见。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
69
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: JSLS, Journal of the Society of Laparoscopic & Robotic Surgeons publishes original scientific articles on basic science and technical topics in all the fields involved with laparoscopic, robotic, and minimally invasive surgery. CRSLS, MIS Case Reports from SLS is dedicated to the publication of Case Reports in the field of minimally invasive surgery. The journals seek to advance our understandings and practice of minimally invasive, image-guided surgery by providing a forum for all relevant disciplines and by promoting the exchange of information and ideas across specialties.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信