Can Body Mass Index Influence the Outcome of a Laparoscopic Hysterectomy?

Gastric Injury at Laparoscopy for Gynecologic Indications: A Systematic Review

OBJECTIVE

This systematic review aims to identify causes of increased risk for and location and mechanism of gastric injury at laparoscopy for gynecologic indications and determine optimal management.

DATA SOURCES

A prospectively registered systematic review (PROSPERO: CRD42021237999) was undertaken and performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Databases searched included Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Medline, Embase, Web of Science, SCOPUS, and Google Scholar from 1960 to 2021.

METHODS OF STUDY SELECTION

All study types were included involving female patients of any age with gastric injury at laparoscopy for gynecologic indication.

TABULATION, INTEGRATION, AND RESULTS

A total of 6294 articles were screened, from which 67 studies were selected for a full-text review. Twenty-eight articles were included, which contained 42 cases drawn from 7 observational studies, 4 case series, and 17 case reports. Of these, 93% (39/42) were at the time of laparoscopic entry, with Veress entry technique used in 79% of these cases (31/39). Eighteen cases reported an entry point, with 77% (14/18) occurring at the periumbilical entry point and 11% (2/18) occurring at Palmer's point. Of the cases with reported etiology for gastric distention or displacement, 64% (9/14) were owing to anesthetic cause. The most common sites of gastric injury were on the anterior stomach wall (n = 8) and the greater curvature (n = 5). Among patients with reported management (32/42), a similar proportion were managed conservatively (11) when compared with repair through laparotomy (13) or laparoscopy (8). All injuries were detected intraoperatively with no reported short-term sequelae.

CONCLUSION

This systematic review of the literature reveals that gastric injury at laparoscopy for gynecologic indications is a rare complication predominantly occurring during laparoscopic entry, most commonly at the periumbilical entry point. When detected intraoperatively, conservative management, laparoscopic, or open repair in the appropriate patient has been performed with no short-term sequelae. The limitations of this review include paucity of cases, detail, and timeline of publications.

Laparoscopic and robotic hysterectomy in endometrial cancer patients with obesity: a systematic review and meta-analysis of conversions and complications

OBJECTIVE DATA

Robotic assistance may facilitate completion of minimally invasive hysterectomy, which is the standard of care for the treatment of early-stage endometrial cancer, in patients for whom conventional laparoscopy is challenging. The aim of this systematic review was to assess conversion to laparotomy and perioperative complications after laparoscopic and robotic hysterectomy in patients with endometrial cancer and obesity (body mass index, ≥30 kg/m²).

STUDY

We systematically searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Evidence-Based Medicine Reviews (January 1, 2000, to July 18, 2018) for studies of patients with endometrial cancer and obesity (body mass index, ≥30 kg/m²) who underwent primary hysterectomy.

STUDY APPRAISAL AND SYNTHESIS METHODS

We determined the pooled proportions of conversion, organ/vessel injury, venous thromboembolism, and blood transfusion. We assessed risk of bias with the Institute of Health Economics Quality Appraisal Checklist for single-arm studies, and Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Scale for double-arm studies.

RESULTS

We identified 51 observational studies that reported on 10,800 patients with endometrial cancer and obesity (study-level body mass index, 31.0-56.3 kg/m²). The pooled proportions of conversion from laparoscopic and robotic hysterectomy were 6.5% (95% confidence interval, 4.3-9.9) and 5.5% (95% confidence interval, 3.3-9.1), respectively, among patients with a body mass index of ≥30 kg/m², and 7.0% (95% confidence interval, 3.2-14.5) and 3.8% (95% confidence interval, 1.4-9.9) among patients with body mass index of ≥40 kg/m². Inadequate exposure because of adhesions/visceral adiposity was the most common reason for conversion for both laparoscopic (32%) and robotic hysterectomy (61%); however, intolerance of the Trendelenburg position caused 31% of laparoscopic conversions and 6% of robotic hysterectomy conversions. The pooled proportions of organ/vessel injury (laparoscopic, 3.5% [95% confidence interval, 2.2-5.5]; robotic hysterectomy, 1.2% [95% confidence interval, 0.4-3.4]), venous thromboembolism (laparoscopic, 0.5% [95% confidence interval, 0.2-1.2]; robotic hysterectomy, 0.5% [95% confidence interval, 0.1-2.0]), and blood transfusion (laparoscopic, 2.8% [95% confidence interval, 1.5-5.1]; robotic hysterectomy, 2.1% [95% confidence interval, 1.6-3.8]) were low and not appreciably different between arms.

CONCLUSION

Robotic and laparoscopic hysterectomy have similar rates perioperative complications in patients with endometrial cancer and obesity, but robotic hysterectomy may reduce conversions because of positional intolerance in patients with morbid obesity. Existing literature is limited by selection and confounding bias, and randomized trials are needed to inform practice standards in this population.