Author:
Förster Christiane E.,Calabretti Iliana,Gubser Laura,Schötzau Andreas,Fellmann-Fischer Bernhard,Heinzelmann-Schwarz Viola,Zwimpfer Tibor A.
Abstract
AbstractLaparoscopic hysterectomy is a commonly performed procedure. However, one high-risk complication is vaginal cuff dehiscence. Currently, there is no standardization regarding thread material or suturing technique for vaginal cuff closure. Therefore, this study aimed to compare extracorporeal and intracorporeal suturing techniques for vaginal cuff closure using a pelvic trainer model. Eighteen experts in laparoscopic surgery performed vaginal cuff closures with interrupted sutures using intracorporeal knotting, extracorporeal knotting and continuous, unidirectional barbed sutures. While using an artificial tissue suturing pad in a pelvic trainer, experts performed vaginal cuff closure using each technique according to block randomization. Task completion time, tension resistance, and the number of errors were recorded. After completing the exercises, participants answered a questionnaire concerning the suturing techniques and their performance. Experts completed suturing more quickly (p < 0.001, p < 0.001, respectively) and with improved tension resistance (p < 0.001, p < 0.001) when using barbed suturing compared to intracorporeal and extracorporeal knotting. Furthermore, the intracorporeal knotting technique was performed faster (p = 0.04) and achieved greater tension resistance (p = 0.023) compared to extracorporeal knotting. The number of laparoscopic surgeries performed per year was positively correlated with vaginal cuff closure duration (p = 0.007). Barbed suturing was a time-saving technique with improved tension resistance for vaginal cuff closure.
Funder
Schweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen Forschung
Gottfried und Julia Bangerter-Rhyner-Stiftung
Freie Gesellschaft Basel
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference32 articles.
1. Sutton, C. Past, present, and future of hysterectomy. J. Minim. Invasive Gynecol. 17, 421–435 (2010).
2. Yi, Y., Zhang, W., Zhou, Q., Guo, W. & Su, Y. Laparoscopic-assisted vaginal hysterectomy versus abdominal hysterectomy for benign disease: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Eur. J. Obstet. Gynecol. Reprod. Biol. 159, 1–18 (2011).
3. Nieboer, T. E. et al. Surgical approach to hysterectomy for benign gynaecological disease. Cochrane Database Syst. Rev. 8, CD003677 (2009).
4. The Federal Office of Public Health. https://www.bag.admin.ch/bag/de/home/zahlen-und-statistiken/zahlen-fakten-zu-spitaelern/qualitaetsindikatoren-der-schweizer-akutspitaeler/qualitaetsindikatoren-fallzahl.exturl.html/aHR0cHM6Ly9zcGl0YWxzdGF0aXN0aWsuYmFnYXBwcy5jaC9wb3/J0YWxfZGUucGhwP3A9cWlmYWxseiZsYW5nPWRlJmJhc2tldD0l/N0NnMy43JTdDMCZxeT0yMDIw.html. Last accessed 2 March 2023.
5. Committee Opinion No 701: Choosing the Route of Hysterectomy for Benign Disease. Obstet. Gynecol. 129, e155–e159 (2017).
Cited by
1 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献