• About Us
    • Contact Us
    • Login
    • ObGFirst
  • COVID-19
  • Alerts
  • OB
  • 2T US Atlas
  • The Genome
  • GYN
    • GYN
    • Sexual Health
  • Primary Care
  • Your Practice
  • GrandRounds
  • My Bookshelf
  • Now@ObG
  • Media
About Us Contact Us Login ObGFirst
  • COVID-19
  • Alerts
  • OB
  • 2T US Atlas
  • The Genome
  • GYN
    • GYN
    • Sexual Health
  • Primary Care
  • Your Practice
  • GrandRounds
  • My Bookshelf
  • Now@ObG
  • Media
Grand Rounds

Does the Reduction in Power Morcellation Use Impact the Minimally Invasive Hysterectomy Rate? 

image_pdfFavoriteLoadingFavorite

PURPOSE:

  • FDA warnings (2014) against the use of power morcellation could have a negative impact on minimally invasive hysterectomy and consequent related benefits
  • Some researchers have reported decreased laparoscopic rates with reduced access to power morcellation
  • Zaritsky et al. (Obstetrics & Gynecology, 2017) sought to address changes in minimally invasive hysterectomy rates in the context of clinical characteristics

METHODS:

  • Trend analysis and retrospective cohort study at Kaiser Permanente Northern California (2008-2015)
  • Quality improvement program to increase minimally invasive hysterectomy (defined as vaginal and laparoscopic hysterectomy)
    • Benchmark increased from 60% to 90%
    • Robotic-assisted laparoscopy limited to complex disease and core group of surgeons
  • All women 18 years of age and older undergoing hysterectomy for benign conditions
  • Primary outcomes
    • Hysterectomy incidence
    • Proportion of hysterectomies by surgical route and power morcellation
  • Secondary study outcomes included clinical and surgical characteristics and complications

RESULTS:

  • 31,971 hysterectomies performed
  • Minimally invasive hysterectomies increased from 39.8% to 93.1%, almost replacing abdominal hysterectomies entirely (P<.001)
  • Vaginal hysterectomies decreased slightly from 26.6% to 23.4% (P<.001)
  • Nonrobotic laparoscopic hysterectomies with power morcellation increased steadily from 3.7% in 2008 to a peak of 11.4% in 2013 then decreased to 0.02% in 2015 (P<.001)
  • Robot-assisted laparoscopic hysterectomies remained a small proportion of all hysterectomies (7.8% of hysterectomies in 2015)
  • Laparoscopic supracervical hysterectomy was strongly associated with power morcellation use (adjusted relative risk 43.89, 95% CI 37.55–51.31)
  • Uterine size (> 1,000 g) was strongly associated with
    • Abdominal vs minimally invasive hysterectomy (adjusted relative risk 11.62; 95% CI 9.89–13.66)
    • Laparoscopic hysterectomy with power morcellation vs without power morcellation (adjusted RR 5.74, 95% CI 4.12–8.00)
  • Complication rates were low but highest rates seen in abdominal hysterectomies
  • No differences in adjusted risk of complications for laparoscopic hysterectomies with vs without power morcellation

CONCLUSION:

  • Unlike previous literature the high rate of minimally invasive hysterectomy was not altered by FDA safety communications
  • Uterine size was the main driver for the decision to use abdominal vs laparoscopic approach and use of morcellation during laparoscopic surgery
  • Authors suggest reasons the high minimially invasive rate was maintained were
    • Less reliance on supracervical hysterectomies
    • Use of manual vs power morcellation

Learn More – Primary Sources:

Minimally Invasive Hysterectomy and Power Morcellation Trends in a West Coast Integrated Health System

image_pdfFavoriteLoadingFavorite

< Previous
All Grand Rounds Posts
Next >

Related ObG Topics:

What is the Incidence of Occult Uterine Malignancy Following Vaginal Hysterectomy with Morcellation?
Uterine Artery Embolization, Focused Ultrasound, or Hysterectomy for Fibroids?
Endometrial Hyperplasia – Current Nomenclature and Treatment

Sections

  • COVID-19
  • Alerts
  • OB
  • GYN
    • GYN
    • Sexual Health
  • 2T US Atlas
  • The Genome
  • Primary Care
  • Your Practice
  • Grand Rounds
  • My Bookshelf
  • Now@ObG
  • Media

Are you an
ObG Insider?

Get specially curated clinical summaries delivered to your inbox every week for free

  • Site Map/
  • © ObG Project/
  • Terms and Conditions/
  • Privacy/
  • Contact Us/
© ObG Project
SSL Certificate


  • Already an ObGFirst Member?
    Welcome back

    Log In

    Want to sign up?
    Get guideline notifications
    CME Included

    Sign Up

Get Guideline Alerts Direct to Your Phone
Try ObGFirst Free!

Sign In

Lost your password?

Sign Up for ObGFirst and Stay Ahead

  • - Professional guideline notifications
  • - Daily summary of a clinically relevant
    research paper
  • - Includes 1 hour of CME every month

ObGFirst Free Trial

Already a Member of ObGFirst®?

Please log in to ObGFirst to access the 2T US Atlas

Password Trouble?

Not an ObGFirst® Member Yet?

  • - Access 2T US Atlas
  • - Guideline notifications
  • - Daily research paper summaries
  • - And lots more!
ObGFirst Free Trial

Media - Internet

Computer System Requirements

OBG Project CME requires a modern web browser (Internet Explorer 10+, Mozilla Firefox, Apple Safari, Google Chrome, Microsoft Edge). Certain educational activities may require additional software to view multimedia, presentation, or printable versions of their content. These activities will be marked as such and will provide links to the required software. That software may be: Adobe Flash, Apple QuickTime, Adobe Acrobat, Microsoft PowerPoint, Windows Media Player, or Real Networks Real One Player.

Disclosure of Unlabeled Use

This educational activity may contain discussion of published and/or investigational uses of agents that are not indicated by the FDA. The planners of this activity do not recommend the use of any agent outside of the labeled indications.

The opinions expressed in the educational activity are those of the faculty and do not necessarily represent the views of the planners. Please refer to the official prescribing information for each product for discussion of approved indications, contraindications, and warnings.

Disclaimer

Participants have an implied responsibility to use the newly acquired information to enhance patient outcomes and their own professional development. The information
presented in this activity is not meant to serve as a guideline for patient management. Any procedures, medications, or other courses of diagnosis or treatment discussed or suggested in this activity should not be used by clinicians without evaluation of their patient’s conditions and possible contraindications and/or dangers in use, review of any applicable manufacturer’s product information, and comparison with recommendations of other authorities.

Jointly provided by

NOT ENOUGH CME HOURS

It appears you don't have enough CME Hours to take this Post-Test. Feel free to buy additional CME hours or upgrade your current CME subscription plan

Subscribe

JOIN OBGFIRST AND GET CME/CE CREDITS

One of the benefits of an ObGFirst subscription is the ability to earn CME/CE credits from the ObG entries you read. Tap the button to learn more about ObGFirst

Learn More
Leaving ObG Website

You are now leaving the ObG website and on your way to PRIORITY at UCSF, an independent website. Therefore, we are not responsible for the content or availability of this site