Misal Meenal, Girardo Marlene, Behbehani Sadikah, Bindra Vimee, Hoffman Mark R, Lim Wei How, Martin Courtney, Mehta Sukrant K, Nensi Alysha, Soares Thiers, Taylor Deborah, Wagner Steve, Wright Kelly N, Wasson Megan N
Department of Gynecology, Mayo Clinic Arizona, Phoenix, Arizona.
Quantitative Health Sciences, Mayo Clinic Arizona, Phoenix, Arizona.
J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2022 May;29(5):683-690. doi: 10.1016/j.jmig.2022.01.010. Epub 2022 Jan 25.
Evaluate inter-rater and intrarater reliability of a novel scoring tool for surgical complexity assessment of endoscopic hysterectomy.
Validation study.
Academic medical center.
Total of 11 academic obstetrician-gynecologists with varying years of postresidency training, clinical practice, and surgical volumes.
Application of a novel scoring tool to evaluate surgical complexity of 150 sets of images taken in a standardized fashion before surgical intervention (global pelvis, anterior cul-de-sac, posterior cul-de-sac, right adnexa, left adnexa). Using only these images, raters were asked to assess uterine size, number, and location of myomas, adnexal and uterine mobility, need for ureterolysis, and presence of endometriosis or adhesions in relevant locations. Surgical complexity was staged on a scale of 1 to 4 (low to high complexity).
Number of postresidency years in practice for participating surgeons ranged from 2 to 15, with an average of 8 years. A total of 8 obstetrician-gynecologists (72.7%) had completed a fellowship in minimally invasive gynecologic surgery. Six (54.6%) reported an annual volume of >50 hysterectomies. Raters reported that 95.4% of the images were satisfactory for assessment. Of the 150 sets of images, most were found to be stage 1 to 2 complexity (stage 1: 23.8%, stage 2: 41.6%, stage 3: 32.8%, stage 4: 1.8%). The level of inter-rater agreement regarding stage 1 to 2 vs 3 to 4 complexity was moderate (κ = 0.49; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.42-0.56). Moderate inter-rater agreement was also found between surgeon raters with an annual hysterectomy volume >50 (κ = 0.49; 95% CI, 0.40-0.57) as well as between surgeon raters with fellowship experience (κ = 0.50; 95% CI, 0.42-0.58). Intrarater agreement averaged 80.2% among all raters and also achieved moderate agreement (mean weighted κ = 0.53; range, 0.38-0.72).
This novel scoring tool uses clinical assessment of preintervention anatomic images to stratify the surgical complexity of endoscopic hysterectomy. It has rich and comprehensive evaluation capabilities and achieved moderate inter-rater and intrarater agreement. The tool can be used in conjunction with or instead of traditional markers of surgical complexity such as uterine weight, estimated blood loss, and operative time.
评估一种用于评估内镜下子宫切除术手术复杂性的新型评分工具的评分者间信度和评分者内信度。
验证性研究。
学术医疗中心。
共有11名学术妇产科医生,他们在住院医师培训后的年限、临床实践经验和手术量各不相同。
应用一种新型评分工具来评估150组在手术干预前以标准化方式拍摄的图像的手术复杂性(全盆腔、前穹窿、后穹窿、右侧附件、左侧附件)。仅使用这些图像,要求评分者评估子宫大小、肌瘤数量和位置、附件及子宫活动度、输尿管松解的必要性以及相关部位是否存在子宫内膜异位症或粘连。手术复杂性按1至4级进行分级(从低到高复杂性)。
参与研究的外科医生的住院医师培训后实践年限为2至15年,平均8年。共有8名妇产科医生(72.7%)完成了微创妇科手术 fellowship。6名(54.6%)报告年子宫切除量>50例。评分者报告称,95.4%的图像对于评估是令人满意的。在150组图像中,大多数被发现为1至2级复杂性(1级:23.8%,2级:41.6%,3级:32.8%,4级:1.8%)。关于1至2级与3至4级复杂性的评分者间一致性水平为中等(κ = 0.49;95%置信区间[CI],0.42 - 0.56)。在年子宫切除量>50例的外科医生评分者之间(κ = 0.49;95% CI,0.40 - 0.57)以及有fellowship经验的外科医生评分者之间(κ = 0.50;95% CI,0.42 - 0.58)也发现了中等程度的评分者间一致性。所有评分者的评分者内一致性平均为80.2%,也达到了中等一致性(平均加权κ = 0.53;范围,0.38 - 0.72)。
这种新型评分工具利用干预前解剖图像的临床评估来对内镜下子宫切除术的手术复杂性进行分层。它具有丰富且全面的评估能力,并实现了中等程度的评分者间和评分者内一致性。该工具可与手术复杂性的传统标志物(如子宫重量、估计失血量和手术时间)结合使用或替代它们。