盆底疾病的外科治疗和术前实验室的应用。

IF 1.8 3区 医学 Q3 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY
Tara Samsel, Sarah Ashmore, Jinxuan Shi, Kimberly Kenton, Margaret Mueller
{"title":"盆底疾病的外科治疗和术前实验室的应用。","authors":"Tara Samsel, Sarah Ashmore, Jinxuan Shi, Kimberly Kenton, Margaret Mueller","doi":"10.1007/s00192-025-06307-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction and hypothesis: </strong>Current national guidelines advise against routine preoperative laboratory testing to assess risk of perioperative events prior to surgery for pelvic floor disorders (PFDs), yet many women undergo unnecessary testing. The primary objective was to determine the clinical utility of preoperative laboratory assessment prior to surgical management of PFDs. Secondary objectives include rates of case cancellation or postponement owing to laboratory abnormalities and factors associated with testing.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A retrospective study was performed of all surgeries within the Division of Urogynecology and Reconstructive Pelvic Surgery at a single academic medical center between 1 January 2021 and 31 December 2024. Patient demographics, clinical characteristics, and preoperative laboratory assessments were abstracted from the medical record. Case cancellation or postponement was documented. Group comparisons were performed using Student's t test and Chi-squared and Fisher's exact test for continuous and categorical variables.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>During the study period, 634 surgeries were performed for PFDs. Four hundred sixty-nine (74%) women had preoperative labs performed. Laboratory abnormalities were rare and did not result in any changes to surgical management. Patients with diabetes mellitus were more likely to have preoperative labs (p = 0.02); otherwise, medical co-morbidities were similar in the two cohorts. Patients who had preoperative labs were more likely to have a hysterectomy (p < 0.001), sacrocolpopexy (p = 0.004), uterosacral ligament suspension (p = 0.001), anterior repair (p < 0.001), and posterior repair (p < 0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Despite the majority of patients undergoing preoperative laboratory testing, clinically meaningful abnormalities were rare and did not change surgical management. Policies surrounding preoperative testing should be re-evaluated to reflect current national guidelines.</p>","PeriodicalId":14355,"journal":{"name":"International Urogynecology Journal","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Surgical Management of Pelvic Floor Disorders and the Utility of Preoperative Labs.\",\"authors\":\"Tara Samsel, Sarah Ashmore, Jinxuan Shi, Kimberly Kenton, Margaret Mueller\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s00192-025-06307-7\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction and hypothesis: </strong>Current national guidelines advise against routine preoperative laboratory testing to assess risk of perioperative events prior to surgery for pelvic floor disorders (PFDs), yet many women undergo unnecessary testing. The primary objective was to determine the clinical utility of preoperative laboratory assessment prior to surgical management of PFDs. Secondary objectives include rates of case cancellation or postponement owing to laboratory abnormalities and factors associated with testing.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A retrospective study was performed of all surgeries within the Division of Urogynecology and Reconstructive Pelvic Surgery at a single academic medical center between 1 January 2021 and 31 December 2024. Patient demographics, clinical characteristics, and preoperative laboratory assessments were abstracted from the medical record. Case cancellation or postponement was documented. Group comparisons were performed using Student's t test and Chi-squared and Fisher's exact test for continuous and categorical variables.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>During the study period, 634 surgeries were performed for PFDs. Four hundred sixty-nine (74%) women had preoperative labs performed. Laboratory abnormalities were rare and did not result in any changes to surgical management. Patients with diabetes mellitus were more likely to have preoperative labs (p = 0.02); otherwise, medical co-morbidities were similar in the two cohorts. Patients who had preoperative labs were more likely to have a hysterectomy (p < 0.001), sacrocolpopexy (p = 0.004), uterosacral ligament suspension (p = 0.001), anterior repair (p < 0.001), and posterior repair (p < 0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Despite the majority of patients undergoing preoperative laboratory testing, clinically meaningful abnormalities were rare and did not change surgical management. Policies surrounding preoperative testing should be re-evaluated to reflect current national guidelines.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":14355,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Urogynecology Journal\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Urogynecology Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-025-06307-7\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Urogynecology Journal","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-025-06307-7","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

前言和假设:目前的国家指南不建议术前常规实验室检测来评估盆底疾病(PFDs)手术前围手术期事件的风险,然而许多妇女进行了不必要的检测。主要目的是确定PFDs手术治疗前术前实验室评估的临床应用。次要目标包括由于实验室异常和与检测相关的因素而取消或推迟病例的比率。方法:回顾性研究于2021年1月1日至2024年12月31日在同一学术医疗中心的泌尿妇科和盆腔重建外科进行的所有手术。从病历中提取患者人口统计、临床特征和术前实验室评估。病例取消或延期记录在案。组间比较采用学生t检验、卡方检验和Fisher精确检验对连续变量和分类变量进行。结果:在研究期间,共进行了634例PFDs手术。469名(74%)妇女进行了术前实验室检查。实验室异常是罕见的,并没有导致任何改变手术处理。糖尿病患者术前检查较多(p = 0.02);除此之外,两组患者的医疗合并症相似。术前检查的患者更有可能进行子宫切除术(p < 0.001)、骶colpopexy (p = 0.004)、子宫骶韧带悬吊(p = 0.001)、前路修复(p < 0.001)和后路修复(p < 0.001)。结论:尽管大多数患者接受了术前实验室检查,但临床上有意义的异常很少,并且没有改变手术处理。术前检测相关政策应重新评估,以反映当前的国家指南。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Surgical Management of Pelvic Floor Disorders and the Utility of Preoperative Labs.

Introduction and hypothesis: Current national guidelines advise against routine preoperative laboratory testing to assess risk of perioperative events prior to surgery for pelvic floor disorders (PFDs), yet many women undergo unnecessary testing. The primary objective was to determine the clinical utility of preoperative laboratory assessment prior to surgical management of PFDs. Secondary objectives include rates of case cancellation or postponement owing to laboratory abnormalities and factors associated with testing.

Methods: A retrospective study was performed of all surgeries within the Division of Urogynecology and Reconstructive Pelvic Surgery at a single academic medical center between 1 January 2021 and 31 December 2024. Patient demographics, clinical characteristics, and preoperative laboratory assessments were abstracted from the medical record. Case cancellation or postponement was documented. Group comparisons were performed using Student's t test and Chi-squared and Fisher's exact test for continuous and categorical variables.

Results: During the study period, 634 surgeries were performed for PFDs. Four hundred sixty-nine (74%) women had preoperative labs performed. Laboratory abnormalities were rare and did not result in any changes to surgical management. Patients with diabetes mellitus were more likely to have preoperative labs (p = 0.02); otherwise, medical co-morbidities were similar in the two cohorts. Patients who had preoperative labs were more likely to have a hysterectomy (p < 0.001), sacrocolpopexy (p = 0.004), uterosacral ligament suspension (p = 0.001), anterior repair (p < 0.001), and posterior repair (p < 0.001).

Conclusions: Despite the majority of patients undergoing preoperative laboratory testing, clinically meaningful abnormalities were rare and did not change surgical management. Policies surrounding preoperative testing should be re-evaluated to reflect current national guidelines.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.80
自引率
22.20%
发文量
406
审稿时长
3-6 weeks
期刊介绍: The International Urogynecology Journal is the official journal of the International Urogynecological Association (IUGA).The International Urogynecology Journal has evolved in response to a perceived need amongst the clinicians, scientists, and researchers active in the field of urogynecology and pelvic floor disorders. Gynecologists, urologists, physiotherapists, nurses and basic scientists require regular means of communication within this field of pelvic floor dysfunction to express new ideas and research, and to review clinical practice in the diagnosis and treatment of women with disorders of the pelvic floor. This Journal has adopted the peer review process for all original contributions and will maintain high standards with regard to the research published therein. The clinical approach to urogynecology and pelvic floor disorders will be emphasized with each issue containing clinically relevant material that will be immediately applicable for clinical medicine. This publication covers all aspects of the field in an interdisciplinary fashion
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信