Complications of Gynecologic Laparoscopy

Analysis and suggestions on the complications in 2000 cases of transvaginal natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery: Can it be a conventional surgery?

OBJECTIVE

To reflect on the complications of transvaginal natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (vNOTES), identify the corresponding risk factors, and provide caution to surgeons when performing this novel surgery.

METHODS

A retrospective study was carried out among 2000 patients in our hospital who underwent vNOTES between May 2019 and May 2022. Perioperative complications were stratified in chronological order and divided into those developed while establishing the vNOTES approach, during surgery, postoperatively, and 1 month after discharge. The complications were classified based on the Modified Clavien-Dindo classifications. The causes of each type III/IV complication were analyzed.

RESULTS

Of the 2000 patients, 88 (4.4%) experienced complications, which is not higher than that reported in laparoendoscopic surgery in previous studies. Grade I, II, III, IV, and V complications developed in 19 (0.95%), 57 (2.85%), 11 (0.55%), 1 (0.05%), and 0 (0%) patients, respectively. Complications were developed while establishing the approach platform, during the surgery, postoperatively, and within 1 month after discharge in 5 (0.25%), 30 (1.50%), 50 (2.50%), and 3 (0.15%) patients, respectively. Eight patients (0.4%) underwent conversion, including five cases of rectal injury repair.

CONCLUSION

The summarized suggestions were divided into three levels. Considering the security and effectiveness of vNOTES, it can be routinely used in various gynecologic operations. However, surgeons should focus on preoperative evaluation, strictly conduct preoperative disinfection, conform to prompt conversion during surgery, call for the presence of experienced doctors, and have routine use of antibiotics to prevent postoperative infections.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ChiCTR2100053483.

Recent advances in benign gynecological laparoscopic surgery

Minimally invasive surgery continues to transform the field of gynecological surgery and is now the standard of care for the surgical treatment of many diseases in gynecology. Owing to minimally invasive surgery's clear advantages, new advances in technology are being employed rapidly and enabling even the most complicated procedures to be performed less invasively. We examine recent literature on minimally invasive surgical innovations, advances, and common practices in benign gynecology that, from our point of view, made an impact on the way laparoscopic surgery is performed and managed in the last decade.

Laparoscopic Major Vascular Injuries in Gynecologic Surgery for Benign Indications: A Systematic Review

OBJECTIVE

To identify the incidence, location, etiology, and mortality of major vascular injuries in gynecologic laparoscopy for benign indications.

DATA SOURCES

A systematic review of PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, ClinicalTrials.gov, and MEDLINE was conducted.

METHODS OF STUDY SELECTION

One thousand ninety-seven studies were screened for inclusion with 147 full-text articles reviewed. Sixty-six studies published between 1978 and 2016 met inclusion criteria, representing 197,062 surgeries. Articles that were included reported the incidence of major vascular injuries during gynecologic laparoscopy for benign indications. Exclusion criteria included surgery for gynecologic malignancy, duplicated data, case series and reports, manuscripts not in English, and studies published only as abstracts.

TABULATION, INTEGRATION, AND RESULTS

Injuries to the aorta, inferior vena cava, iliac (common, external, or internal), and inferior epigastric vessels were recorded, as were injuries denoted as major but not otherwise specified. A total of 179 major vascular injuries were reported with an incidence of 0.09% (95% CI 0.08-0.10). The inferior epigastric vessels were the most commonly injured vessel (0.04%, 95% CI 0.03-0.05), comprising 48% (95% CI 40-55) of all injuries. The majority of injuries occurred during abdominal entry (82%, 95% CI 76-89), and the remainder occurred during surgical dissection (18%, 95% CI 11-24). Most injuries were recognized intraoperatively (93%, 95% CI 87-100), and approximately half (55%, 95% CI 46-63) required laparotomy for repair. Only two of the 179 major vascular injuries resulted in death, for an overall mortality rate from vascular injuries of 0.001% (95% CI 0.000-0.004).

CONCLUSION

The incidence of major vascular injury during gynecologic laparoscopy found in this review is very low, and the vast majority of injuries did not result in death. Laparoscopy remains a safe surgical technique in relation to vascular injuries when performed for benign gynecologic disease.

Vascular injury at laparoscopy: a guide to management

Vascular laparoscopic injuries are rare (0.2/1000), however, they are associated with 6-13% morbidity and mortality. Commonest sites for catastrophic haemorrhage are the right iliac vessels, inferior vena cava and less commonly the abdominal aorta. The injuries commonly occur at entry using a Veress needle or insertion of trocars. These risks are inherent to all laparoscopic surgery. A systematic approach for managing these includes prompt recognition, communication within the operative team, immediate resuscitation and specific operative strategies for the control of vascular haemorrhage based on the location and severity of the injury. Major vascular injuries may require midline laparotomy and vascular surgeons. 1:1:1 resuscitation and adjunct haemostatic agents may help. Major vascular injury is a rare but a potentially fatal complication. We propose a skills and drills approach to improve outcomes. We also propose a practical algorithms for the management of haemorrhage in the acute situation.

Understanding the Legal Essentials of a Bowel Injury Lawsuit in Minimally Invasive Gynecologic Surgery

Bowel injury is a known inherent complication of minimally invasive gynecologic surgery; however, it does not automatically signify medical malpractice. Plaintiff attorneys representing patients seeking legal recourse from a bowel injury typically allege claims of intraoperative negligence, delay in diagnosis, or lack of informed consent in an effort to circumvent the assertion that it is a known inherent complication. In addition, damage awards in bowel injury lawsuits can easily exceed the amount covered by the policy limits of a medical malpractice insurance plan, leaving the gynecologist financially responsible for the difference. Therefore, it is crucial to understand when it may be appropriate to consent to a settlement offer, which can relieve the gynecologist from financial liability for amounts awarded above the medical malpractice policy limits. The purpose of this medical-legal review is to make minimally invasive gynecologic surgeons more aware of the legal strategies used by plaintiff attorneys representing patients who have incurred bowel injuries, and how to limit liability in lawsuits.

A Review of Laparoscopic Salpingo-Oophorectomy: Technique and Perioperative Considerations

Hysterectomy is the most frequently performed major gynecologic surgery in women in the United States. This procedure is often accompanied by unilateral or bilateral removal of the fallopian tubes and ovaries. Although the overall incidence of bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy has been shown to be in a decreasing trend in recent years, it is possibly 1 of the most common scenarios that the gynecologic surgeon will encounter. As the field of minimally invasive surgery continues to expand, it is expected that most of these surgeries will be performed using a laparoscopic approach. In fact, data support that adnexal surgery is more likely to take place during a laparoscopic hysterectomy when compared with abdominal or vaginal routes. This article reviews the basic surgical principles and relevant anatomic relations that every pelvic surgeon should know and aims to serve as a guide for effectively and proficiently performing a salpingo-oophorectomy at the time of hysterectomy.

Major vascular injury in laparoscopic urology

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Major vascular injury is the most devastating complication of laparoscopy, occurring most commonly during the laparoscopic entry phase. Our goal is to report our experience with major vascular injury during laparoscopic entry with closed- and open-access techniques in urologic procedures.

METHODS

All 5347 patients who underwent laparoscopic urologic procedures from 1996 to 2011 at our hospital were included in the study. Laparoscopic entry was carried out by either the closed Veress needle technique or the modified open Hasson technique. Patients' charts were reviewed retrospectively to investigate for access-related major vascular injuries.

RESULTS

The closed technique was used in the first 474 operations and the open technique in the remaining 4873 cases. Three cases of major vascular injury were identified among our patients. They were 3 men scheduled for nephrectomy without any history of surgery. All injuries occurred in the closed-access group during the setup phase with insertion of the first trocar. The injury location was the abdominal aorta in 2 patients and the external iliac vein in 1 patient. Management was performed after conversion to open surgery, control of bleeding, and repair of the injured vessel.

CONCLUSIONS

Given the high morbidity and mortality rates associated with major vascular injury, its clinically higher incidence in laparoscopic urologic procedures with the closed-access technique leads us to suggest using the open technique for the entry phase of laparoscopy. Using the open-access technique may decrease laparophobia and encourage a higher number of urologists to enter the laparoscopy field.

Coming to terms with the fact that the evidence for laparoscopic entry is as good as it gets

Entry to the peritoneal cavity for laparoscopic surgery is associated with defined morbidity, with all entry techniques associated with substantial complications. Debate over the safest entry technique has raged over the last 2 decades, and yet, we are no closer to arriving at a scientifically valid conclusion regarding technique superiority. With hundreds of thousands of patients required to perform adequately powered studies, it is unlikely that appropriately powered comparative studies could be undertaken. This review examines the risk of complications related to laparoscopic entry, current statements from examining bodies around the world, and the medicolegal ramifications of laparoscopic entry complications. Because of the numbers required for any complications study, with regard to arriving at an evidence-based decision for laparoscopic entry, we ask: is the current literature perhaps as good as it gets?

Video-assisted laparoscopy for the detection and diagnosis of endometriosis: safety, reliability, and invasiveness

Endometriosis is a highly enigmatic disease with multiple presentations ranging from infertility to severe pain, often causing significant morbidity. Video-assisted laparoscopy (VALS) has now replaced laparotomy as the gold standard for the diagnosis and management of endometriosis. While imaging has a role in the evaluation of some patients, histologic examination is needed for a definitive diagnosis. Laboratory evaluation currently has a minor role in the diagnosis of endometriosis, although studies are underway investigating serum markers, genetic studies, and endometrial sampling. A high index of suspicion is essential to accurately diagnose this complex condition, and a multidisciplinary approach is often indicated. The following review discusses laparoscopic diagnosis of endometriosis from the pre-operative evaluation of patients suspected of having endometriosis to surgical technique for safe and adequate laparoscopic diagnosis of the condition and postsurgical care.

Recognition and management of major vessel injury during laparoscopy

Laparoscopy is one of the most commonly performed procedures in the United States. Injury to a major retroperitoneal vessel occurs in 0.3% to 1.0% of procedures, most commonly during laparoscopic entry while placing the Veress needle or primary trocar. Fatal outcome can be related to massive gas embolism or exsanguination. Recommended treatment for gas embolism can range from supportive measures to external chest compression and insertion of a central line to withdraw gas from the right side of the heart. Recommended treatment of major vessel injury with massive hemorrhage consists of rapid laparotomy and control of hemorrhage using direct pressure until a surgeon experienced in vascular procedures arrives. When a major vessel injury occurs in a surgical facility distant from a medical center and without an available surgeon with vascular experience, based on the trauma literature, we recommend temporary control of blood loss using abdominal packing and closure (i.e., "damage control surgery") and judicious resuscitation (i.e., "damage control resuscitation") before transportation to a medical center.