Brzozowski Nicole, Deng Lily, Laibangyang Anya, Gill Skylar, Talari Mounikasai, Nolan Bradley, Wakefield Dorothy B, Doo David, Chuang Linus
Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Biology, Danbury Hospital, Danbury, CT. (Drs. Brzozowski, Laibangyang, Gill, Talari, Nolan, Wakefield, Doo, and Chuang).
Larner College of Medicine, University of Vermont, Burlington, VT. (Dr. Deng).
JSLS. 2024 Oct-Dec;28(4). doi: 10.4293/JSLS.2024.00035. Epub 2025 Jan 17.
Proficiency with laparoscopic suturing is often the rate-limiting step in performing a total laparoscopic hysterectomy. Intracorporeal suturing is challenging due to difficulties with needle control and tissue handling. Endoscopic suturing devices may improve operator experience.
To compare rates of vaginal cuff complications between cuff closures performed with an endoscopic device versus conventional laparoscopic instruments.
IRB-approved retrospective cohort study from 2018 to 2022. Data were stored in REDCap. Statistical analyses were performed with SAS 9.4.
A total of 223 patients were included; 29 patients experienced a vaginal cuff complication (13%). There was a nonsignificant trend towards increased cuff complications in the Endo Stitch group (19.2% vs 11.4%, = .16; OR = 1.8, 95% CI 0.78-4.38). Patients with an Endo Stitch closure had significantly more cases of cuff cellulitis (8.5% vs 0%, = .002). There was no significant difference in pelvic fluid collections or abscess (2.1% vs 1.1%, = .51). While all cases of cuff dehiscence occurred in the conventional closure group, the difference was not statistically significant (0% vs 2.8%, = .59). There was no significant difference in vaginal bleeding (14.9% vs 9.1%, = .24).
No significant difference was observed in composite vaginal cuff complications using barbed suture with the Endo Stitch device versus conventional laparoscopic instruments. However, the trend towards increased cuff complications and the significantly increased rates of cuff cellulitis observed with an Endo Stitch closure is concerning. As the current data is limited by a small sample size, both methods should be considered appropriate. However, more studies at higher power are needed.
腹腔镜缝合技术的熟练程度往往是实施全腹腔镜子宫切除术的限速步骤。由于针的控制和组织操作困难,体内缝合具有挑战性。内镜缝合装置可能会改善术者的操作体验。
比较使用内镜装置与传统腹腔镜器械进行阴道残端闭合术后阴道残端并发症的发生率。
2018年至2022年经机构审查委员会批准的回顾性队列研究。数据存储在REDCap中。使用SAS 9.4进行统计分析。
共纳入223例患者;29例患者出现阴道残端并发症(13%)。Endo Stitch组阴道残端并发症有增加的趋势,但差异无统计学意义(19.2%对11.4%,P = 0.16;OR = 1.8,95%CI 0.78 - 4.38)。Endo Stitch闭合的患者中,阴道残端蜂窝织炎的病例明显更多(8.5%对0%,P = 0.002)。盆腔积液或脓肿方面无显著差异(2.1%对1.1%,P = 0.51)。虽然所有阴道残端裂开病例均发生在传统闭合组,但差异无统计学意义(0%对2.8%,P = 0.59)。阴道出血方面无显著差异(14.9%对9.1%,P = 0.24)。
使用Endo Stitch装置的倒刺缝线与传统腹腔镜器械在复合阴道残端并发症方面未观察到显著差异。然而,Endo Stitch闭合时阴道残端并发症增加的趋势以及阴道残端蜂窝织炎发生率显著增加令人担忧。由于目前数据受样本量小的限制,两种方法都应被视为合适的。然而,需要更多高样本量的研究。