Original Article
CME Article: Current Clinical Practice Patterns in Total Vaginal Hysterectomy
Abstract
Objectives: There are no data on current surgical practice patterns for benign total vaginal hysterectomy (TVH) despite recently published guidelines. The objective was to determine gynecologic surgeon practice patterns regarding TVH perioperative interventions and to assess adherence to clinical practice guidelines.Methods: A survey to assess TVH practice patterns was distributed to gynecologic surgical society members for completion. The primary outcome was to compare adherence to practice guidelines between fellowship-trained and non–fellowship-trained gynecologic surgeons. Secondary outcomes included comparing adherence based on age, practice location, and hysterectomy volume.
Results: Of the 204 respondents, there were 163 (80%) fellowship-trained and 41 (20%) non–fellowship-trained gynecologic surgeons. Fellowship-trained surgeons were more likely than non–fellowship-trained surgeons to use vaginal packing (34% vs 15%, P = 0.028), which is contrary to the recommendations. No cohort followed the guideline recommending a circular cervicovaginal incision. Fellowship-trained surgeons also were more likely than non–fellowship-trained surgeons to use the clamp and suture technique for vessel ligation (88% vs 68%, P = 0.004); otherwise, there were no significant differences between cohorts for adherence to any of the other guidelines. Although fellowship-trained surgeons were adherent to fewer of the guidelines as compared with surgeons without fellowship training, both groups generally adhered to a majority of the clinical practice guidelines for benign TVH.
Conclusions: This information demonstrates a need for the development of targeted education and interventions to increase the use of evidence-based clinical practice guidelines during TVH for both fellowship-trained and non–fellowship-trained gynecologic surgeons.
Posted in: Obstetrics and Gynecology77
This content is limited to qualifying members.
Existing members, please login first
If you have an existing account please login now to access this article or view purchase options.
Purchase only this article ($25)
Create a free account, then purchase this article to download or access it online for 24 hours.
Purchase an SMJ online subscription ($75)
Create a free account, then purchase a subscription to get complete access to all articles for a full year.
Purchase a membership plan (fees vary)
Premium members can access all articles plus recieve many more benefits. View all membership plans and benefit packages.
References
1. Merrill RM. Hysterectomy surveillance in the United States, 1997 through 2005. Med Sci Monit 2008;14:CR24–CR31.
2. Cohen SL, Vitonis AF, Einarsson JI. Updated hysterectomy surveillance and factors associated with minimally invasive hysterectomy. JSLS 2014;18: e2014.00096.
3. Wu JM, Wechter ME, Geller EJ, et al. Hysterectomy rates in the United States, 2003. Obstet Gynecol 2007;110:1091–1095.
4. American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology Committee on Gynecologic Practice. Committee opinion no. 701 summary: choosing the route of hysterectomy for benign disease. https://www.acog.org/clinical/clinical-guidance/committee-opinion/articles/2017/06/choosing-the-route-of-hysterectomy-for-benign-disease#:~:text=Minimally%20invasive%20approaches%20to%20hysterectomy%20. Published 2017. Accessed July 20, 2023.
5. Aarts JW, Nieboer TE, Johnson N, et al. Surgical approach to hysterectomy for benign gynaecological disease. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2015;8: CD003677.
6. Einarsson JI, Matteson KA, Schulkin J, et al. Minimally invasive hysterectomies—a survey on attitudes and barriers among practicing gynecologists. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 2010;17:167–175.
7. Jeppson JC, Balgobin D, Rahn DD, et al. Comparison of vaginal hysterectomy techniques and interventions for benign indications: a systematic review. Obstet Gynecol 2017;129:877–886.
8. Chryosotomou A, Djokovic D, Edridge W, et al. Evidence-based guidelines for vaginal hysterectomy of the International Society for Gynecology Endoscopy (ISGE). Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2018;231:262–267.
9. Harris PA, Taylor R, Thielke R, et al. Research electronic data capture (REDCap)—a metadata-driven methodology and workflow process for providing translational research informatics support. J Biomed Inform 2009;42: 377–381.
10. Harris PA, Taylor R, Minor BL, et al. The REDCap consortium: building an international community of software partners. J Biomed Inform 2019;95: 103208.
11. Vree FE, Cohen SL, Chavan N, et al. The impact of surgeon volume on perioperative outcomes in hysterectomy. JSLS 2014;18:174–181.
12. Nelson G, Altman AD, Nick A, et al. Guidelines for pre- and intra-operative care in gynecologic/oncology surgery: Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Society recommendations—part 1. Gynecol Oncol 2016;140: 313–322.
13. Gressel GM, Potts JR, Cha S, et al. Hysterectomy route and numbers reported by gradating residents in obstetrics and gynecology training programs. Obstet Gynecol 2020;135:268–273.
14. Singh R, Yurteri-Kaplan LA, Morrow MM, et al. Sitting versus standing makes a difference in musculoskeletal discomfort and postural load for surgeons performing vaginal surgery. Int Urogynecol J 2019;30:231–237.
15. Wells AC, Kjellman M, Harper SJF, et al. Operating hurts: a study of EAES surgeons. Surg Endosc 2019;33:933–940.
16. MacKoul P, Danilyants N, Baxi R, et al. Laparoscopic hysterectomy outcomes: hospital vs ambulatory surgery center. JSLS 2019;23:e2018.00076.
17. Danilyants N, MacKoul PJ, Baxi RP, et al. Comparison of clinical outcomes of laparoscopic hysterectomy in an ambulatory surgery center versus outpatient hospital setting. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 2017;24(suppl):S171.
18. Ahmad NZ, Byrnes G, Naqvi SA. A meta-analysis of ambulatory versus inpatient laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Surg Endosc 2008;22:1928–1934.
19. Ross WT, Meister MR, Shepherd JP, et al. Utilization of apical vaginal support procedures at time of inpatient hysterectomy performed for benign conditions: a national estimate. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2017;217:436.e1–436.e8.
