Laparoscopic Hysterectomy Route, Resource Use, and Outcomes: Change After Power Morcellation Warning
- PMID: 31348209
- DOI: 10.1097/AOG.0000000000003375
Laparoscopic Hysterectomy Route, Resource Use, and Outcomes: Change After Power Morcellation Warning
Abstract
Objective: To examine changes in utilization of different types of laparoscopic hysterectomy, as well as their associated resource use and surgical outcomes, after the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) safety statement in April 2014 regarding power morcellation.
Methods: We retrospectively analyzed data from the 2012-2016 American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program and identified 145,746 women undergoing hysterectomy for benign indications. We measured use of laparoscopic supracervical hysterectomy compared to total laparoscopic hysterectomy (including laparoscopic-assisted vaginal hysterectomy) in these patients, as well as operative time, surgical setting (inpatient vs outpatient), length of stay, and 30-day surgical outcomes (wound complication, medical complication, reoperation, and readmission). We used an interrupted time series analysis to examine the association between FDA warning and changes in utilization and outcomes of laparoscopic hysterectomy.
Results: After adjusting for patient characteristics and background trends in practice, use of laparoscopic supracervical hysterectomy was significantly lower in the postwarning than prewarning period (odds ratio [OR]=0.49, 95% CI 0.45-0.53), whereas use of total laparoscopic hysterectomy was not affected (OR 1.01, 95% CI 0.96-1.06). Overall, after an initial reduction, use of laparoscopic hysterectomy (laparoscopic supracervical hysterectomy and total laparoscopic hysterectomy combined) increased over time in the postwarning period (adjusted OR of utilization for each calendar quarter elapsed=1.03, 95% CI 1.02-1.03). After the FDA warning, operative time for laparoscopic supracervical hysterectomy increased by 11.45 minutes (95% CI 6.22-16.69), whereas the decreasing trend in the likelihood of inpatient stay for total laparoscopic hysterectomy was attenuated (OR for each calendar quarter elapsed=0.92 in prewarning period, 95% CI 0.91-0.93; and 0.97 in postwarning period, 95% CI 0.97-0.98). There was no significant change in 30-day surgical outcomes after the FDA warning.
Conclusion: Rates of laparoscopic supracervical hysterectomy fell in association with power morcellation safety warnings, whereas rates of other laparoscopic hysterectomies continued to rise. There was no change in patient outcomes among laparoscopic hysterectomies.
Comment in
-
Rising From the Ashes: Minimally Invasive Surgery in the Wake of Power Morcellation.Obstet Gynecol. 2019 Aug;134(2):225-226. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0000000000003386. Obstet Gynecol. 2019. PMID: 31348208 No abstract available.
Similar articles
-
Hospital variation in responses to safety warnings about power morcellation in hysterectomy.Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2021 Jun;224(6):589.e1-589.e13. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2020.12.1207. Epub 2020 Dec 24. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2021. PMID: 33359176 Free PMC article.
-
Practice Patterns and Complications of Benign Hysterectomy Following the FDA Statement Warning Against the Use of Power Morcellation.JAMA Surg. 2018 Jun 20;153(6):e180141. doi: 10.1001/jamasurg.2018.0141. Epub 2018 Jun 20. JAMA Surg. 2018. PMID: 29641835 Free PMC article.
-
Practice patterns and postoperative complications before and after US Food and Drug Administration safety communication on power morcellation.Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2016 Jan;214(1):98.e1-98.e13. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2015.08.047. Epub 2015 Aug 24. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2016. PMID: 26314519
-
Complications in Laparoscopic Supracervical Hysterectomy(LASH), especially the morcellation related.Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 2016 Aug;35:44-50. doi: 10.1016/j.bpobgyn.2015.11.001. Epub 2015 Nov 14. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 2016. PMID: 26694587 Review.
-
[Hysterectomy for benign gynaecological disease: Surgical approach, vaginal suture method and morcellation: Guidelines].J Gynecol Obstet Biol Reprod (Paris). 2015 Dec;44(10):1168-82. doi: 10.1016/j.jgyn.2015.09.032. Epub 2015 Oct 31. J Gynecol Obstet Biol Reprod (Paris). 2015. PMID: 26527018 Review. French.
Cited by
-
Access to Hysterectomy-What Is the Realistic Rate for Pure Vaginal Hysterectomy? A Single-Center Prospective Observational Study.J Clin Med. 2024 Oct 15;13(20):6130. doi: 10.3390/jcm13206130. J Clin Med. 2024. PMID: 39458080 Free PMC article.
-
An age-period-cohort analysis of hysterectomy incidence trends in Germany from 2005 to 2019.Sci Rep. 2024 Jul 2;14(1):15110. doi: 10.1038/s41598-024-66019-8. Sci Rep. 2024. PMID: 38956303 Free PMC article.
-
Cervical Cancer Stage at Diagnosis and Survival among Women ≥65 Years in California.Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2023 Jan 9;32(1):91-97. doi: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-22-0793. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2023. PMID: 36620897 Free PMC article.
-
Safety Warning about Laparoscopic Power Morcellation in Hysterectomy: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of National Impact.Womens Health Rep (New Rochelle). 2022 Mar 28;3(1):369-384. doi: 10.1089/whr.2021.0101. eCollection 2022. Womens Health Rep (New Rochelle). 2022. PMID: 35415718 Free PMC article.
-
What We Know about the Long-Term Risks of Hysterectomy for Benign Indication-A Systematic Review.J Clin Med. 2021 Nov 16;10(22):5335. doi: 10.3390/jcm10225335. J Clin Med. 2021. PMID: 34830617 Free PMC article. Review.
Publication types
MeSH terms
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Medical
Miscellaneous
