Incidence of Postoperative Adhesions after Laparoscopic Myomectomy with Barbed Suture

Efficacy and safety of V-Loc™ barbed sutures versus conventional suture techniques in gynecological surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

One of the most challenging tasks in laparoscopic gynecological surgeries is suturing. Knotless barbed sutures are intended to enable faster suturing and hemostasis. We carried out a meta-analysis to compare the efficacy and safety of V-Loc™ barbed sutures (VBS) with conventional sutures (CS) in gynecological surgeries.

METHODS

We systematically searched PubMed and EMBASE for studies published between 2010 and September 2021 comparing VBS to CS for OB/GYN procedures. All comparative studies were included. Primary analysis and subgroup analyses for the different surgery and suturing types were performed. Primary outcomes were operation time and suture time; secondary outcomes included post-operative complications, surgical site infections, estimated blood loss, length of stay, granulation tissue formation, and surgical difficulty. Results were calculated as weighted mean difference (WMD) or risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) with a random effects model, and a sensitivity analysis for study quality, study size, and outlier results was performed. PROSPERO registration: CRD42022363187.

RESULTS

In total, 25 studies involving 4452 women undergoing hysterectomy, myomectomy, or excision of endometrioma. VBS were associated with a reduction in operation time (WMD - 17.08 min; 95% CI - 21.57, - 12.59), suture time (WMD - 5.39 min; 95% CI - 7.06, - 3.71), surgical site infection (RR 0.26; 95% CI 0.09, 0.78), estimated blood loss (WMD - 44.91 ml; 95% CI - 66.01, - 23.81), granulation tissue formation (RR 0.48; 95% CI 0.25, 0.89), and surgical difficulty (WMD - 1.98 VAS score; 95% CI - 2.83, - 1.13). No difference between VBS and CS was found regarding total postoperative complications or length of stay. Many of the outcomes showed high heterogeneity, likely due to the inclusion of different surgery types and comparators. Most results were shown to be robust in the sensitivity analysis except for the reduction in granulation tissue formation.

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis indicates that V-Loc™ barbed sutures are safe and effective in gynecological surgeries as they reduce operation time, suture time, blood loss, infections, and surgical difficulty without increasing post-operative complications or length of stay compared to conventional sutures.

Laparoscopic myomectomy complications: META analysis on RCTs and review of large cohort studies

Complications of myomectomy are generally rare and highly dependent on the surgeons' skills and selection of patients. Haemorrhage, direct injury, post-operative pain and fever present as intra and peri-operative complications, while adhesions are considered late complications. 21 RCTs and 15 meta-analyses have been conducted to date, with the last comprehensive meta-analysis being published in 2009. The main disadvantage of the previous meta-analysis included incomplete selection of studies, inclusion of studies with small sample sizes, and major heterogeneity of methods used between studies. The aim of this meta-analysis comparing laparoscopic myomectomy (LMy) to open conservative myomectomy is to provide an updated review of the type, frequency and severity of complications. These results can direct teaching efforts and guidelines and give updated advice to gynaecologists. A literature search was conducted on PubMed and Google scholar for RCTs on this topic. 276 studies were identified and 19 RCTs ultimately met the criteria for inclusion in the meta-analysis and subsequent heterogeneity assessment. The results showed that laparoscopic myomectomy has a more favourable outcome with regards to several complications when compared with laparotomy. Laparoscopic myomectomy is significantly associated with lower Hg drop (WMD = -0.48, 95% CI [-0.89, -0.07], p = 0.02179); lower incidence of post-operative fever (RR = 0.43, 95% CI [0.29, 0.64], p < 0.001); lower levels of pain at 48Hrs post-op (WMD = -0.88, 95% CI [-1.63, -0.014], p = 0.02020) and decreased analgesia requests (RR = 0.49, 95% CI [0.37, 0.64], p < 0.0001). Prophylaxis use was associated with less adhesions (RR = 0.064, 95% CI [0.44, 0.92], p = 0.01), although not enough data was available to draw conclusions regarding specific prophylactic agents. No differences were found between LMy and laparotomy for blood loss (WMD = -13.6494, 95% CI [-44.48, 17.18], p = 0.38553) or pain at 24Hrs post-op (WMD = -0.19, 95% CI [-0.55, 0.18], p = 0.32136). These findings support previously published meta-analyses. Given the right indications of the surgery and training of the surgeon, LMy seems to be most preferable to laparotomy in achieving a better clinical result with fewer complications.

Laparoscopic myomectomy - The importance of surgical techniques

Laparoscopy is a routine procedure for benign gynecological tumors. Although the laparoscopic approach for myomas is a common procedure, it can be challenging. To improve outcomes, research regarding port access, suture type, morcellation, and complication management remains ongoing. Myomectomy is the main surgical option for patients seeking uterus-sparing procedures to maintain future fertility. The laparoscopic technique is the most important in these cases, given that possible complications can impact fertility and pregnancy outcomes. Herein, we reviewed and collated the available data regarding different suture techniques, including advantages, difficulties, and possible long-term impacts.

Effects of Using Barbed Suture in Myomectomy on Adhesion Formation and Adverse Pregnancy Outcome

Background: There is still concern regarding postoperative adhesion formation and adverse effects on pregnancy outcomes caused by barbed suture (BS) after myomectomy. The aim of this study was to compare the postoperative adhesion and pregnancy outcomes between conventional suture (CS) and BS after minimally invasive myomectomy (MIM) by robotic myomectomy (RM) or laparoscopic myomectomy (LM). Methods: The medical records of 94 women who had undergone MIM with CS and 97 who had undergone MIM with BS and achieved pregnancy were reviewed. Postoperative adhesion was evaluated following cesarean section. Results: The number of removed myomas was greater (5.3 ± 4.6 vs. 3.5 ± 3.1, p = 0.001) and the size of the largest myoma was larger (7.0 ± 2.2 vs. 5.8 ± 2.7 cm, p = 0.001) in the BS group relative to the CS group. A total of 98.9% of patients in the CS group and 45.4% in the BS group had undergone LM (p < 0.001), while the others underwent RM. There was no significant difference in the presence of postoperative adhesion at cesarean section between the BS and CS groups (45.5 vs. 43.7%, p = 0.095). Additionally, there were no intergroup differences in pregnancy complications such as preterm labor, placenta previa, accrete or abruption. Note also that in our logistic regression analysis, the suture type (BS or CS) was excluded from the independent risk factors regarding postoperative adhesion formation. Conclusions: Our data indicated that the incidence of postoperative adhesion after MIM with BS was similar when compared with CS. Also it seems that the suture type does not have a significant effect on pregnancy outcomes.

Comparison of learning curves for laparoendoscopic single-site myomectomy performed by 2 surgeons

We aimed to compare the learning curves of 2 surgeons with different endoscopic bases when performing laparoendoscopic single-site myomectomy (LESS-M). We retrospectively analyzed and compared 2 groups of patients who underwent LESS-M performed by 2 surgeons with different bases in multi-port laparoscopic surgery (MLS) from October 2019 to December 2020 at West China Second Hospital of Sichuan University. Patients' characteristics and related surgical indicators were compared, and surgeons' learning curves were analyzed using a cumulative sum analysis. All of the patients completed LESS-M without converting to MLS or laparotomy, despite Surgeon A being MLS-unqualified and Surgeon B being MLS-qualified. There were no significant differences in patients' characteristics or surgical indicators between the 2 groups (P > 0.05 for all). Surgeons A and B crossed the learning curve after 21 and 18 cases, respectively. LESS-M is safe and feasible. Approximately 20 cases are required for surgeons to achieve LESS-M proficiency, and surgeons without MLS experience can still master LESS-M.