Utilization and perioperative outcomes of robotic vaginal vault suspension compared to abdominal or vaginal approaches for pelvic organ prolapse

Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Sacrocolpopexy Approach

IMPORTANCE

Racial inequity elevates risk for certain diagnoses and health disparities. Current data show disparities for Black women when comparing open versus minimally invasive hysterectomy. It is unknown if a similar disparity exists in surgical management of pelvic organ prolapse.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to determine whether racial or ethnic disparities exist for open abdominal versus minimally invasive sacrocolpopexy.

STUDY DESIGN

Cross-sectional data of the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project National Inpatient Sample and the Nationwide Ambulatory Surgery Sample for the year 2019 was used. Bivariate analysis identified demographic and perioperative differences between abdominal versus minimally invasive sacrocolpopexy, which were compared in a multivariable logistic regression.

RESULTS

Forty-one thousand eight hundred thirty-seven patients underwent sacrocolpopexy: 35,820 (85.6%), minimally invasive sacrocolpopexy, and 6,016, (14.4%) abdominal sacrocolpopexy. In an unadjusted analysis, Black patients were more likely to undergo an abdominal sacrocolpopexy compared to non-Hispanic White patients (OR 2.14, 95% CI 1.16-3.92, P <0.01). Hispanic patients were more likely to undergo abdominal sacrocolpopexy compared to non-Hispanic White patients (OR 1.69, 95% CI 1.26-2.26, P <0.001). Other factors associated with abdominal sacrocolpopexy are zip code quartile, payer status, composite comorbidity score, hospital control, and hospital bed size. In the regression model, Black patients remained more likely to undergo abdominal sacrocolpopexy compared to those who identified as White (aOR 2, 95% CI 1.26-3.16, P < 0.003). Hispanic patients were more likely to undergo abdominal sacrocolpopexy compared to those who identified as White (aOR 1.73, 95% CI 1.31-2.28, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Abdominal sacrocolpopexy was more likely to occur in patients who identified as Black or Hispanic.

Driving time drives the hospital choice: choice models for pelvic organ prolapse surgery in Italy

OBJECTIVE

The Italian healthcare jurisdiction promotes patient mobility, which is a major determinant of practice variation, thus being related to the equity of access to health services. We aimed to explore how travel times, waiting times, and other efficiency- and quality-related hospital attributes influenced the hospital choice of women needing pelvic organ prolapse (POP) surgery in Tuscany, Italy.

METHODS

We obtained the study population from Hospital Discharge Records. We duplicated individual observations (n = 2533) for the number of Tuscan hospitals that provided more than 30 POP interventions from 2017 to 2019 (n = 22) and merged them with the hospitals' list. We generated the dichotomous variable "hospital choice" assuming the value one when hospitals where patients underwent surgery coincided with one of the 22 hospitals. We performed mixed logit models to explore between-hospital patient choice, gradually adding the women's features as interactions.

RESULTS

Patient choice was influenced by travel more than waiting times. A general preference for hospitals delivering higher volumes of interventions emerged. Interaction analyses showed that poorly educated women were less likely to choose distant hospitals and hospitals providing greater volumes of interventions compared to their counterpart. Women with multiple comorbidities more frequently chose hospitals with shorter average length of stay.

CONCLUSION

Travel times were the main determinants of hospital choice. Other quality- and efficiency-related hospital attributes influenced hospital choice as well. However, the effect depended on the socioeconomic and clinical background of women. Managers and policymakers should consider these findings to understand how women behave in choosing providers and thus mitigate equity gaps.

Robotic pelvic organ prolapse surgery

Robotic sacrocolpopexy (RSC) has rapidly gained popularity over the past 10 years, owing to claims that it is associated with a reduced learning curve compared with standard laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy (LSC) and that it has equal efficacy to the gold-standard treatment, abdominal sacrocolpopexy (ASC). The specifics of the surgical technique used for RSC vary widely, but the basic steps and principles are largely the same. Although complication rates are low, specific complications can be minimized by meticulous attention to surgical technique at several important points in the procedure. Multiple levels of evidence support the efficacy of RSC, and show that it is associated with a shorter hospital stay and convalescence than ASC. The learning curve for RSC usually comprises 10-20 procedures but for those with extensive experience of laparoscopy it is likely to be even shorter. RSC is more expensive than LSC but cheaper than ASC. As RSC has only been used for about a decade, we await long-term outcomes of more than a few years.

Robotic surgical skill acquisition: What one needs to know?

Robotic surgery has been eagerly adopted by patients and surgeons alike in the field of urology, over the last decade. However, there is a lack of standardization in training curricula and accreditation guidelines to ensure surgeon competence and patient safety. Accordingly, in this review, we aim to highlight ‘who’ needs to learn ‘what’ and ‘how’, to become competent in robotic surgery. We demonstrate that both novice and experienced open surgeons require supervision and mentoring during the initial phases of robotic surgery skill acquisition. The experienced open surgeons possess domain knowledge, however, need to acquire technical knowledge under supervision (either in simulated or clinical environment) to successfully transition to robotic surgery, whereas, novice surgeons need to acquire both domain as well as technical knowledge to become competent in robotic surgery. With regard to training curricula, a variety of training programs such as academic fellowships, mini-fellowships, and mentored skill courses exist, and cater to the needs and expectations of postgraduate surgeons adequately. Fellowships provide the most comprehensive training, however, may not be suitable to all surgeon-learners secondary to the long-term time commitment. For these surgeon-learners short-term courses such as the mini-fellowships or mentored skill courses might be more apt. Lastly, with regards to credentialing uniformity in criteria regarding accreditation is lacking but earnest efforts are underway. Currently, accreditation for competence in robotic surgery is institutional specific.

The growth of computer-assisted (robotic) surgery in urology 2000-2014: The role of Asian surgeons

Objective

A major role in the establishment of computer-assisted robotic surgery (CARS) can be traced to the work of Mani Menon at Vattikuti Urology Institute (VUI), and of many surgeons of Asian origin. The success of robotic surgery in urology has spurred its acceptance in other surgical disciplines, improving patient comfort and disease outcomes and helping the industrial growth. The present paper gives an overview of the progress and development of robotic surgery, especially in the field of Urology; and to underscore some of the seminal work done by the VUI and Asian surgeons in the development of robotic surgery in urology in the US and around the world.

Methods

PubMed/Medline and Scopus databases were searched for publications from 2000 through June 2014, using algorithms based on keywords “robotic surgery”, ”prostate”, “kidney”, “adrenal”, “bladder”, “reconstruction”, and “kidney transplant”. Inclusion criteria used were published full articles, book chapters, clinical trials, prospective and retrospective series, and systematic reviews/meta-analyses written in English language. Studies from Asian institutions or with the first/senior author of Asian origin were included for discussion, and focused on techniques of robotic surgery, relevant patient outcomes and associated demographic trends.

Results

A total of 58 articles selected for final review highlight the important strides made by robots in urology, from robotic radical prostatectomy in 2000 to robotic kidney transplant in 2014. In the hands of an experienced robotic surgeon, it has been demonstrated to improve functional patient outcomes and minimize perioperative complications compared to open surgery, especially in urologic oncology and reconstructive urology. With increasing surgeon proficiency, the benefits of robotic surgery were consistently seen across different surgical disciplines, patient populations, and strata.

Conclusion

The addition of robot to the surgical armamentarium has allowed better patient care and improved disease outcomes. VUI and surgeons of Asian origin have played a pioneering role in dissemination of computer-assisted surgery.