Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

Complication Rate of Laparoscopic Hysterectomies in Denmark, 2011-2016.

Background and Objectives: After the U. S. Food and Drug Administration's recommendation against the use of power morcellation for tissue extraction in minimally invasive hysterectomy, the number of procedures completed laparoscopically declined in favor of open surgery laparotomy. We conducted a retrospective cohort study comparing perioperative and long-term outcomes, including complications associated with laparoscopic hysterectomy before and after the FDA recommendation.

Methods: We included procedures performed in Danish government hospitals (GHs) and a hospital specializing in minimally invasive gynecological surgery (MIGS). Different types of hysterectomy over the period from January 2011 through May 2016 were examined.

Results: Hysterectomies were analyzed from GHs (n = 21,495) and from a hospital specializing in MIGS (n = 749). In the GHs, we found a decrease in open hysterectomy from 40% in 2011 to 20% in 2016. In the MIGS hospital, 4 of 749 (0.05%) open hysterectomies were performed during the 6 years; however, there was a change in operative technique. After the FDA recommendation, there was a shift from laparoscopic subtotal hysterectomy (LSH) to total laparoscopic hysterectomy (TLH) from 32% in 2011 to 82% by May 2016. Containment bags were used in LSH and large-uterus TLH after the 2014 advisory. Significantly more complications occurred in the GHs than in the MIGS hospital: 3224/21,495 (15%) vs 53/749 (7.0%), respectively.

Conclusion: The rate of minimally invasive hysterectomies continues to increase. However, after 2014, many of the morcellation techniques have been replaced by a minilaparotomy to extract the uterus at the end of surgery, compared to the use of the contained morcellation in 100% of cases in the MIGS hospital. There was a major difference in complication rates between the hospitals that is partly explainable by the challenge in training residents and the low operative volume of surgeons in GHs.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app