Major vascular injury during gynecologic cancer surgery

OBJECTIVE

Vascular injury during major gynecologic cancer surgery is a rare but potentially fatal complication. The purpose of this study was to review our experience with major vascular injury during gynecologic cancer surgery.

METHODS

This was a retrospective chart review of women undergoing surgery by our gynecologic oncology department from 7/1/99 to 6/30/20 who had a major vascular injury. We identified women who sustained a vascular injury by a combination of CPT code and medical record searches, fellow case logs and a list maintained for an ongoing quality assurance program. Data were expressed as median and range for continuous variables and as frequency and percentage for categorical variables. Fisher's exact test was used to analyze differences in complication rates between groups.

RESULTS

Major vascular injury was identified in 52 patients and procedures. The inferior vena cava was the most common site of injury, 32.7% (17/52), followed by the external iliac vein, 23.1% (12/52). Lymph node dissection was the most common time for a vascular injury to occur 51.9% (27/52). The majority of injuries required suture repair, 80.8% (42/52). Estimated blood loss in cases with vascular injury ranged from 100 mL to massive unquantifiable blood loss in the case of an aortic injury. Patients required a median of 2units of packed red blood cells. Postoperative complications included anemia requiring blood transfusion, 19.6% (9/46) and venous thromboembolism, 19.6% (9/46).

CONCLUSIONS

Vascular injury remains a rare but potentially morbid complication of gynecologic oncologic surgery. Prompt recognition and management are imperative in minimizing persistent bleeding and complications.

Major venous injury and large volume crystalloid resuscitation: A limb threatening combination

INTRODUCTION

Major venous injury (MVI) affecting the lower extremity can result in subsequent amputation. The contribution of intraoperative resuscitation efforts on the need for amputation is not well defined. We hypothesized that intraoperative large volume crystalloid resuscitation (LVCR) increases the risk of amputation after MVI, while massive transfusion (MT) does not.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective review of patients with infrarenal MVI from 2005 to 2015 at seven urban level I trauma centers. The outcome of interest was the need for secondary amputation.

RESULTS

478 patients were included. 31 (6.5%) patients with MVI required amputation. LVCR(p < 0.001), combined arterial/venous injury (p = 0.001), and associated fracture (p = 0.001) were significant risk factors for amputation. MT did not significantly increase amputation risk (p = 0.44). Multivariable logistic regression model demonstrated that patients receiving ≥5L LVCR(aOR (95% CI): 9.7 (2.9, 33.0); p < 0.001), with combined arterial/venous injury (aOR (95% CI):3.6 (1.5, 8.5); p = 0.004), and with an associated fracture (aOR (95% CI):3.2 (1.5, 7.1); p = 0.004) were more likely to require amputation.

CONCLUSION

Patients with MVI who receive LVCR, have combined arterial/venous injuries and have associated fractures are more likely to require amputation. MT was not associated with delayed amputation.

Venous injury during lymphadenectomy: management without laparotomy

During robotically-assisted pelvic lymphadenectomy, four venous injuries occurred that did not resolve with pressure. After the application of tightly woven, oxidized regenerated cellulose and a fibrin sealant, all four venotomies were hemostatic. There were no sequelae.