Economic and survival implications of use of electric power morcellation for hysterectomy for presumed benign gynecologic disease

Journal of the National Cancer Institute

Volumn 107, Issue 11, 2015, Pages

  Wright, Jason D ^a,c,d   Cui, Rosa R ^a   Wang, Anqi ^b   Chen, Ling ^a   Tergas, Ana I ^a,c   Burke, William M ^a,c,d   Ananth, Cande V ^a   Hou, June Y ^a,c,d   Neugut, Alfred I ^a,b,c,d   Temkin, Sarah M ^e   Wang, Y Claire ^b   Hershman, Dawn L ^a,b,c,d  

^a New York Presbyterian Columbia University Medical Center   (United States)

^b Department of Medicine ^*  (United States)

^c Department of Medicine   (United States)

^d NEW YORK PRESBYTERIAN HOSPITAL   (United States)

^e NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ABDOMINAL HYSTERECTOMY; ABDOMINAL SURGERY; ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; BENIGN TUMOR; CANCER MORTALITY; CANCER SURGERY; CANCER SURVIVAL; COMPARATIVE STUDY; COMPUTER SIMULATION; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; DISSEMINATED CANCER; ECONOMIC EVALUATION; ELECTRIC POWER MORCELLATION; ENDOMETRIUM TUMOR; FEMALE; FEMALE GENITAL TRACT TUMOR; HEALTH CARE COST; HOSPITAL READMISSION; HUMAN; HYSTERECTOMY; LAPAROSCOPIC HYSTERECTOMY; LAPAROSCOPIC SURGERY; LENGTH OF STAY; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MIDDLE AGED; MORCELLATION; MORTALITY RISK; MUSCLE TUMOR; PERIOPERATIVE PERIOD; PEROPERATIVE COMPLICATION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITY ADJUSTED LIFE YEAR; RISK BENEFIT ANALYSIS; SURGICAL MORTALITY; UTERUS SARCOMA; COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; ECONOMICS; ELECTRICITY; EPIDEMIOLOGY; GENITAL DISEASES, FEMALE; LAPAROSCOPY; LEIOMYOMA; MORTALITY; PROCEDURES; SURVIVAL ANALYSIS; UNITED STATES; UTERINE NEOPLASMS;

ADULT; AGED; COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; ELECTRICITY; FEMALE; GENITAL DISEASES, FEMALE; HUMANS; HYSTERECTOMY; LAPAROSCOPY; LEIOMYOMA; MIDDLE AGED; SURVIVAL ANALYSIS; UNITED STATES; UTERINE NEOPLASMS;

EID: 84981298036     PISSN: 00278874     EISSN: 14602105     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/jnci/djv251     Document Type: Article

References (60)

1. Hagemann IS, Hagemann AR, LiVolsi VA, Montone KT, Chu CS. Risk of occult malignancy in morcellated hysterectomy: a case series. Int J Gynecol Pathol. 2011;30(5):476-483.
2. Seidman MA, Oduyebo T, Muto MG, Crum CP, Nucci MR, Quade BJ. Peritoneal dissemination complicating morcellation of uterine mesenchymal neoplasms. PLoS One. 2012;7(11):e50058.
3. Food and Drug Administration. Quantitative assessment of the prevalence of unsuspected uterine sarcoma in women undergoing treatment of uterine fibroids. http://www. fda. gov/downloads/MedicalDevices/Safety/Alertsand-Notices/UCM393589. pdf. Accessed September 29, 2014.
4. Wright JD, Tergas AI, Burke WM, et al. Uterine pathology in women undergoing minimally invasive hysterectomy using morcellation. JAMA. 2014;312(12):1253-1255.
5. Einstein MH, Barakat RR, Chi DS, et al. Management of uterine malignancy found incidentally after supracervical hysterectomy or uterine morcellation for presumed benign disease. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2008;18(5):1065-1070.
6. George S, Barysauskas C, Serrano C, et al. Retrospective cohort study evaluating the impact of intraperitoneal morcellation on outcomes of localized uterine leiomyosarcoma. Cancer. 2014;120(20):3154-3158.
7. Oduyebo T, Rauh-Hain AJ, Meserve EE, et al. The value of re-exploration in patients with inadvertently morcellated uterine sarcoma. Gynecol Oncol. 2014;132(2):360-365.
8. Park JY, Park SK, Kim DY, et al. The impact of tumor morcellation during surgery on the prognosis of patients with apparently early uterine leiomyosarcoma. Gynecol Oncol. 2011;122(2):255-259.
9. Kho KA, Nezhat CH. Evaluating the risks of electric uterine morcellation. JAMA. 2014;311(9):905-906.
10. Society of Gynecologic Oncology. Morcellation. 2013. https://http://www. sgo. org/newsroom/position-statements-2/morcellation/. Accessed February 15, 2014.
11. Johnson N, Barlow D, Lethaby A, Tavender E, Curr L, Garry R. Methods of hysterectomy: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. BMJ. 2005;330(7506):1478.
12. Nieboer TE, Johnson N, Lethaby A, et al. Surgical approach to hysterectomy for benign gynaecological disease. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2009;(3):CD003677.
13. Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Database. http://healthservices. cancer. gov/seermedicare/overview/. Accessed July 15, 2014
14. Guntupalli SR, Ramirez PT, Anderson ML, Milam MR, Bodurka DC, Malpica A. Uterine smooth muscle tumor of uncertain malignant potential: a retrospective analysis. Gynecol Oncol. 2009;113(3):324-326.
15. Kluivers KB, Johnson NP, Chien P, Vierhout ME, Bongers M, Mol BW. Comparison of laparoscopic and abdominal hysterectomy in terms of quality of life: a systematic review. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2008;136(1):3-8.
16. Ellstrom M, Olsen MF, Olsson JH, Nordberg G, Bengtsson A, Hahlin M. Pain and pulmonary function following laparoscopic and abdominal hysterectomy: a randomized study. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 1998;77(9):923-928.
17. Falcone T, Paraiso MF, Mascha E. Prospective randomized clinical trial of laparoscopically assisted vaginal hysterectomy versus total abdominal hysterectomy. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1999;180(4):955-962.
18. Ferrari MM, Berlanda N, Mezzopane R, Ragusa G, Cavallo M, Pardi G. Identifying the indications for laparoscopically assisted vaginal hysterectomy: a prospective, randomised comparison with abdominal hysterectomy in patients with symptomatic uterine fibroids. BJOG. 2000;107(5):620-625.
19. Garry R, Fountain J, Mason S, et al. The eVALuate study: two parallel randomised trials, one comparing laparoscopic with abdominal hysterectomy, the other comparing laparoscopic with vaginal hysterectomy. BMJ. 2004;328(7432):129.
20. Harkki-Siren P, Sjoberg J, Toivonen J, Tiitinen A. Clinical outcome and tissue trauma after laparoscopic and abdominal hysterectomy: a randomized controlled study. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2000;79(10):866-871.
21. Hwang JL, Seow KM, Tsai YL, Huang LW, Hsieh BC, Lee C. Comparative study of vaginal, laparoscopically assisted vaginal and abdominal hysterectomies for uterine myoma larger than 6 cm in diameter or uterus weighing at least 450 g: a prospective randomized study. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2002;81(12):1132-1138.
22. Kluivers KB, Hendriks JC, Mol BW, et al. Quality of life and surgical outcome after total laparoscopic hysterectomy versus total abdominal hysterectomy for benign disease: a randomized, controlled trial. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2007;14(2):145-152.
23. Kongwattanakul K, Khampitak K. Comparison of laparoscopically assisted vaginal hysterectomy and abdominal hysterectomy: a randomized controlled trial. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2012;19(1):89-94.
24. Langebrekke A, Eraker R, Nesheim BI, Urnes A, Busund B, Sponland G. Abdominal hysterectomy should not be considered as a primary method for uterine removal. A prospective randomised study of 100 patients referred to hysterectomy. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 1996;75(4):404-407.
25. Lumsden MA, Twaddle S, Hawthorn R, et al. A randomised comparison and economic evaluation of laparoscopic-assisted hysterectomy and abdominal hysterectomy. BJOG. 2000;107(11):1386-1391.
26. Marana R, Busacca M, Zupi E, Garcea N, Paparella P, Catalano GF. Laparoscopically assisted vaginal hysterectomy versus total abdominal hysterectomy: a prospective, randomized, multicenter study. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1999;180(2, pt 1): 270-275.
27. Olsson JH, Ellstrom M, Hahlin M. A randomised prospective trial comparing laparoscopic and abdominal hysterectomy. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 1996;103(4):345-350.
28. Perino A, Cucinella G, Venezia R, Castelli A, Cittadini E. Total laparoscopic hysterectomy versus total abdominal hysterectomy: an assessment of the learning curve in a prospective randomized study. Hum Reprod. 1999;14(12):2996-2999.
29. Raju KS, Auld BJ. A randomised prospective study of laparoscopic vaginal hysterectomy versus abdominal hysterectomy each with bilateral salpingooophorectomy. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 1994;101(12):1068-1071.
30. Ribeiro SC, Ribeiro RM, Santos NC, Pinotti JA. A randomized study of total abdominal, vaginal and laparoscopic hysterectomy. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2003;83(1):37-43.
31. Schutz K, Possover M, Merker A, Michels W, Schneider A. Prospective randomized comparison of laparoscopic-assisted vaginal hysterectomy (LAVH) with abdominal hysterectomy (AH) for the treatment of the uterus weighing >200 g. Surg Endosc. 2002;16(1):121-125.
32. Seracchioli R, Venturoli S, Vianello F, et al. Total laparoscopic hysterectomy compared with abdominal hysterectomy in the presence of a large uterus. J Am Assoc Gynecol Laparosc. 2002;9(3):333-338.
33. Summitt RL Jr, Stovall TG, Steege JF, Lipscomb GH. A multicenter randomized comparison of laparoscopically assisted vaginal hysterectomy and abdominal hysterectomy in abdominal hysterectomy candidates. Obstet Gynecol. 1998;92(3):321-326.
34. Yuen PM, Mak TW, Yim SF, et al. Metabolic and inflammatory responses after laparoscopic and abdominal hysterectomy. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1998;179(1):1-5.
35. Boyd LR, Novetsky AP, Curtin JP. Effect of surgical volume on route of hysterectomy and short-term morbidity. Obstet Gynecol. 2010;116(4):909-915.
36. Brummer TH, Jalkanen J, Fraser J, et al. FINHYST, a prospective study of 5279 hysterectomies: complications and their risk factors. Hum Reprod. 2011;26(7):1741-1751.
37. Hansen CT, Moller C, Daugbjerg S, Utzon J, Kehlet H, Ottesen B. Establishment of a national Danish hysterectomy database: preliminary report on the first 13, 425 hysterectomies. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2008;87(5):546-557.
38. Kafy S, Huang JY, Al-Sunaidi M, Wiener D, Tulandi T. Audit of morbidity and mortality rates of 1792 hysterectomies. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2006;13(1):55-59.
39. Makinen J, Johansson J, Tomas C, et al. Morbidity of 10 110 hysterectomies by type of approach. Hum Reprod. 2001;16(7):1473-1478.
40. Varol N, Healey M, Tang P, Sheehan P, Maher P, Hill D. Ten-year review of hysterectomy morbidity and mortality: can we change direction? Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 2001;41(3):295-302.
41. Wiser A, Holcroft CA, Tulandi T, Abenhaim HA. Abdominal versus laparoscopic hysterectomy for benign diseases: evaluation of morbidity and mortality among 465, 798 cases. Gynecol Surg. 2013;10(2):117-122.
42. Fennessy FM, Kong CY, Tempany CM, Swan JS. Quality-of-life assessment of fibroid treatment options and outcomes. Radiology. 2011;259(3):785-792.
43. Gorlero F, Lijoi D, Biamonti M, et al. Hysterectomy and women satisfaction: total versus subtotal technique. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2008;278(5):405-410.
44. Grann VR, Jacobson JS, Sundararajan V, Albert SM, Troxel AB, Neugut AI. The quality of life associated with prophylactic treatments for women with BRCA1/2 mutations. Cancer J Sci Am. 1999;5(5):283-292.
45. Grann VR, Jacobson JS, Thomason D, Hershman D, Heitjan DF, Neugut AI. Effect of prevention strategies on survival and quality-adjusted survival of women with BRCA1/2 mutations: an updated decision analysis. J Clin Oncol. 2002;20(10):2520-2529.
46. Guest JF, Sladkevicius E, Gough N, Linch M, Grimer R. Utility values for advanced soft tissue sarcoma health States from the general public in the United kingdom. Sarcoma. 2013;2013:863056.
47. Kwon JS, Sun CC, Peterson SK, et al. Cost-effectiveness analysis of prevention strategies for gynecologic cancers in Lynch syndrome. Cancer. 2008;113(2):326-335.
48. Sculpher M, Manca A, Abbott J, Fountain J, Mason S, Garry R. Cost effectiveness analysis of laparoscopic hysterectomy compared with standard hysterectomy: results from a randomised trial. BMJ. 2004;328(7432):134.
49. Soini EJ, Garcia San Andres B, Joensuu T. Trabectedin in the treatment of metastatic soft tissue sarcoma: cost-effectiveness, cost-utility and value of information. Ann Oncol. 2011;22(1):215-223.
50. Tengs TO, Wallace A. One thousand health-related quality-of-life estimates. Med Care. 2000;38(6):583-637.
51. Yang KY, Caughey AB, Little SE, Cheung MK, Chen LM. A cost-effectiveness analysis of prophylactic surgery versus gynecologic surveillance for women from hereditary non-polyposis colorectal cancer (HNPCC) Families. Familial Cancer. 2011;10(3):535-543.
52. Brown ML, Riley GF, Schussler N, Etzioni R. Estimating health care costs related to cancer treatment from SEER-Medicare data. Med Care. 2002;40(8 suppl): IV-104-17.
53. Warren JL, Brown ML, Fay MP, Schussler N, Potosky AL, Riley GF. Costs of treatment for elderly women with early-stage breast cancer in fee-for-service settings. J Clin Oncol. 2002;20(1):307-316.
54. Yabroff KR, Lamont EB, Mariotto A, et al. Cost of care for elderly cancer patients in the United States. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2008;100(9):630-641.
55. United States Department of Labor. Bureau of Labor Statistics. http://www. bls. gov/cps/cpsaat37. htm. Accessed October 3, 2014.
56. AAGL Statement to the FDA on Power Morcellation. http://www. aagl. org/aaglnews/aagl-statement-to-the-fda-on-power-morcellation/. Accessed September 29, 2014.
57. Wright JD, Ananth CV, Lewin SN, et al. Robotically assisted vs laparoscopic hysterectomy among women with benign gynecologic disease. JAMA. 2013;309(7):689-698.
58. Levitz J, Kamp, J. Debate grows over possible dangers from a type of hysterectomy. The Wall Streeet Journal. 2014.
59. Curfman GD, Redberg RF. Medical devices-balancing regulation and innovation. N Engl J Med. 2011;365(11):975-977.
60. Updated Laparoscopic Uterine Power Morcellation in Hysterectomy and Myomectomy: FDA Safety Communication. http://www. fda. gov/MedicalDevices/Safety/AlertsandNotices/ucm424443. htm. Accessed December 3, 2014.