Incidence of Unanticipated Uterine Pathology at the Time ofMinimally Invasive Abdominal Sacrocolpopexy

Journal of Minimally Invasive Gynecology

Volumn 21, Issue 1, 2014, Pages 97-100

  Andy, Uduak U ^a   Nosti, Patrick A ^b   Kane, Sarah ^c   White, Dena ^d   Lowenstein, Lior ^e   Gutman, Robert E ^b   Harvie, Heidi S ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA   (United States)

^b GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^c METROHEALTH MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^d UNIVERSITY OF OKLAHOMA   (United States)

^e Rambam Health Care Campus ^*  (Israel)

Author keywords

Minimally invasive sacrocolpopexy; Pelvic organ prolapsed; Unanticipated pathology

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; BODY MASS; CASE STUDY; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; HUMAN; INCIDENCE; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MINIMALLY INVASIVE SACROCOLPOPEXY; MINIMALLY INVASIVE SURGERY; PARITY; POSTMENOPAUSE; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; ROBOTICS; SURGICAL TECHNIQUE; UTERUS BLEEDING; UTERUS DISEASE; VAGINAL HYSTERECTOMY;

MINIMALLY INVASIVE SACROCOLPOPEXY; PELVIC ORGAN PROLAPSED; UNANTICIPATED PATHOLOGY;

AGED; FEMALE; HUMANS; HYSTERECTOMY; INCIDENCE; INCIDENTAL FINDINGS; MIDDLE AGED; PELVIC ORGAN PROLAPSE; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; UTERINE DISEASES;

EID: 84891144204     PISSN: 15534650     EISSN: 15534669     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jmig.2013.07.008     Document Type: Article

References (12)

1. Nygaard I.E., McCreery R., Brubaker L., Connolly A., Cundiff G., Weber A.M. Abdominal sacrocolpopexy: a comprehensive review. Obstet Gynecol 2004, 104:805-823.
2. Bradley S.L., Weidner A.C., Siddiqui N.Y., Gandhi M.P., Wu J.M. Shifts in national rates of inpatient prolapse surgery emphasize current coding inadequacies. Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg 2011, 17:204-208.
3. Bensinger G., Lind L., Lesser M., Guess M., Winkler H. Abdominal sacral suspensions: analysis of complications using permanent mesh. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2005, 193:2094-2098.
4. Park J.-Y., Park S.-K., Kim D.-Y., et al. The impact of tumor morcellation during surgery on the prognosis of patients with apparently early uterine leiomyosarcoma. Gynecol Oncol 2011, 122:255-259.
5. Frick A.C., Walters M.D., Larkin K.S., Barber M.D. Risk of unanticipated abnormal gynecologic pathology at the time of hysterectomy for uterovaginal prolapse. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2010, 202:507.e1-507.e4.
6. Ramm O., Gleason J.L., Sehal S., Antosh D.D., Kenton K.S. Utility of preoperative endometrial assessment in asymptomatic women undergoing hysterectomy for pelvic floor dysfunction. Int Urogynecol J 2012, 23:913-917.
7. Renganathan A., Edwards R., Duckett J.R. Uterus conserving prolapse surgery: what is the chance of missing a malignancyα. Int Urogynecol J 2010, 21:819-821.
8. Jamal A., Murray T., Ward E., et al. Cancer statistics, 2005. CA Cancer J Clin 2005, 55:10-30.
9. Ries L.A., Eisner M.P., Kosary C.L., et al. SEER Cancer Statistics Review, 1975-2001 2004, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD.
10. Creasman W.T., Odicino F., Maisonneuve P., et al. Carcinoma of the corpus uteri. FIGO 26th annual report on the results of treatment in gynecologic dancer. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2006, 95:S105-S143.
11. Einstein M.H., Barakat R.R., Chi D.S., et al. Management of uterine malignancy found incidentally after supracervical hysterectomy or uterine morcellation for presumed benign disease. Int J Gynecol Cancer 2009, 18:1065-1070.
12. McPenow A.M., Erekson E.A., Guess M.K., Martin D., Patel D.A., Xu X. Cost-effectiveness of endometrial evaluation prior to morcellation in surgical procedures for prolapse. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2013, 208:e1-e9.