Perioperative Outcomes of Vesicovaginal Fistula Repair by Surgical Approach

Author:

Jefferson Francis A.1,Hanson Kristine T.2,Robinson Maraika O.1,Habermann Elizabeth B.2,Madsen Annetta M.3,Gebhart John B.3,Linder Brian J.

Affiliation:

1. Department of Urology

2. The Robert D. and Patricia E. Kern Center for the Science of Health Care Delivery Surgical Outcomes Program

3. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN.

Abstract

Importance Data comparing perioperative outcomes between transvaginal, transabdominal, and laparoscopic/robotic vesicovaginal fistula (VVF) repair are limited but are important for surgical planning and patient counseling. Objective This study aimed to assess perioperative morbidity of VVF repair performed via various approaches. Study Design The American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database was used to identify women who underwent transvaginal, transabdominal, or laparoscopic/robotic VVF repair from 2009 to 2020. Associations of surgical approach with baseline characteristics, blood transfusion, prolonged hospitalization (>4 days), and 30-day outcomes (any major or minor complication or return to the operating room) were evaluated with χ2, Fisher exact, and Kruskal-Wallis tests. Multivariable logistic regression models assessed the adjusted association of approach with 30-day complications and prolonged hospitalization. Results Overall, 449 women underwent VVF repair, including 252 transvaginal (56.1%), 148 transabdominal (33.0%), and 49 laparoscopic/robotic procedures (10.9%). Abdominal repair was associated with a longer length of hospitalization (median, 3 days vs 1 day transvaginal and laparoscopic/robotic; P < 0.001), higher risk of prolonged length of stay (abdominal, 21.1%; transvaginal, 4.0%; laparoscopic/robotic, 2.0%; P < 0.001), major complications (abdominal, 4.7%; transvaginal, 0.8%; laparoscopic/robotic, 0.0%; P = 0.03), and perioperative transfusion (abdominal, 5.0%; transvaginal, 0.0%; laparoscopic/robotic, 2.1%; P = 0.01). On multivariable analysis, the abdominal approach was independently associated with an increased risk of prolonged hospitalization compared with laparoscopic/robotic (odds ratio, 12.3; 95% confidence interval, 1.63–93.21; P = 0.02) and transvaginal (odds ratio, 6.09; 95% confidence interval, 2.87–12.92; P < 0.001) but not with major/minor complications (P = 0.76). Conclusion Transvaginal and laparoscopic/robotic approaches to VVF repair are associated with lower rates of prolonged hospitalization, major complications, and readmission compared with a transabdominal approach.

Publisher

Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)

Subject

Urology,Obstetrics and Gynecology,Surgery

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3