Safety of Three-Dimensional versus Two-Dimensional Laparoscopic Hysterectomy during the COVID-19 Pandemic
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Patients
- Conversion to abdominal hysterectomy.
- Intraoperative complications: transfusion-related hemorrhage, injury to the bladder, intestine, ureter, or vessels, and anesthesiological problems.
- Postoperative complications: infection or temperature above 38.8C, hematomas, revisions/secondary procedures, deep venous thrombosis, fistula formation, and wound-healing disturbances.
2.2. Uterine Morcellation
2.3. Laparoscopic Equipment
2.4. Laparoscopic Technique
2.5. Statistical Analysis
3. Results
4. Discussion
5. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Ludwig, S.; Zarbock, A. Coronaviruses and SARS-CoV-2: A Brief Overview. Anesth. Analg. 2020, 131, 93–96. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Rausei, S.; Ferrara, F.; Zurleni, T.; Frattini, F.; Chiara, O.; Pietrabissa, A.; Sarro, G.; for Italian Association of Hospital Surgeons, and Collected Data Contributors. Dramatic decrease of surgical emergencies during COVID-19 outbreak. J. Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2020, 89, 1085–1091. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Stöß, C.; Steffani, M.; Kohlhaw, K.; Rudroff, C.; Staib, L.; Hartmann, D.; Friess, H.; Müller, M.W. The COVID-19 pandemic: Impact on surgical departments of non-university hospitals. BMC Surg. 2020, 20, 313. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Ortiz, E.I.; Castañeda, E.H.; De La Torre, A. Coronavirus (COVID 19) Infection in Pregnancy. Colomb. Med. 2020, 51, e4271. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Tivey, D.R.; Davis, S.S.; Kovoor, J.G.; Babidge, W.J.; Tan, L.; Hugh, T.J.; Collinson, T.G.; Hewett, P.J.; Padbury, R.T.A.; Maddern, G.J. Safe surgery during the coronavirus disease 2019 crisis. ANZ J. Surg. 2020, 90, 1553–1557. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Morris, S.N.; Fader, A.N.; Milad, M.P.; Dionisi, H.J. Understanding the “Scope” of the Problem: Why Laparoscopy Is Considered Safe during the COVID-19 Pandemic. J. Minim. Invasive Gynecol. 2020, 27, 789–791. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- El Boghdady, M.; Ewalds-Kvist, B.M. Laparoscopic Surgery and the debate on its safety during COVID-19 pandemic: A systematic review of recommendations. Surgeon 2020, 19, e29–e39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zago, M.; Uranues, S.; Chiarelli, M.E.; Grandi, S.; Fumagalli, L.A.; Tavola, M.; Chiarugi, M.; Mariani, D.; Wienerroither, V.; Kurihara, H.; et al. Enhancing safety of laparoscopic surgery in COVID-19 era: Clinical experience with low-cost filtration devices. Eur. J. Trauma Emerg. Surg. 2020, 46, 731–735. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- ESGE Recommendations for Gynaecological Endoscopic Surgery for COVID-19 Outbreak. Facts Views Vis. Obgyn. 2020, 12, 5.
- Wenzl, R.; Pateisky, N.; Husslein, P. Erstmaliger Einsatz eines 3D-Videoendoskopes in der Gynäkologie [First use of a 3D video-endoscope in gynecology]. Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd. 1993, 53, 776–778. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Sibio, S.; Di Carlo, S.; Sica, G.S. 3D Laparoscopy: A Potential Cutting Edge in Minimal Invasive Digestive Surgery. Gastroenterol. Med. Res. 2018, 2, GMR-000539. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists’ Committee on Gynecologic Practice. Uterine Morcellation for Presumed Leiomyomas: ACOG Committee Opinion, Number 822. Obstet Gynecol. 2021, 137, e63–e74. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Choosing the route of hysterectomy for benign disease. ACOG Committee Opinion No. 701. Obstet. Gynecol. 2017, 129, e155–e159. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Mueller, A.; Renner, S.; Haeberle, L.; Lermann, J.; Oppelt, P.; Beckmann, M.W.; Thiel, F. Comparison of total laparoscopic hysterectomy (TLH) and laparoscopy-assisted supracervical hysterectomy (LASH) in women with uterine leiomyoma. Eur. J. Obstet. Gynecol. Reprod. Biol. 2009, 144, 76–79. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Usta, T.A.; Karacan, T.; Naki, M.M.; Calik, A.; Turkgeldi, L.; Kasimogullari, V.; Calık, A. Comparison of 3-dimensional versus 2-dimensional laparoscopic vision system in total laparoscopic hysterectomy: A retrospective study. Arch. Gynecol. Obstet. 2014, 290, 705–709. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Yazawa, H.; Takiguchi, K.; Imaizumi, K.; Wada, M.; Ito, F. Surgical outcomes of total laparoscopic hysterectomy with 2-dimensional versus 3-dimensional laparoscopic surgical systems. FUKUSHIMA J. Med. Sci. 2018, 64, 38–45. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Sinha, R.; Chawla, L.; Raje, S.; Rao, G. A Retrospective Comparative Analysis of 2D Versus 3D Laparoscopy in Total Laparoscopic Hysterectomy for Large Uteri (≥500 g). Surg. Technol. Online 2017, 33, 38–43. [Google Scholar]
- Berlit, S.; Hornemann, A.; Sütterlin, M.; Weiss, C.; Tuschy, B. Laparoscopic hysterectomy in the overweight and obese: Does 3D imaging make a change? Arch. Gynecol. Obstet. 2017, 295, 125–131. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sørensen, S.M.D.; Savran, M.M.; Konge, L.; Bjerrum, F. Three-dimensional versus two-dimensional vision in laparoscopy: A systematic review. Surg. Endosc. 2016, 30, 11–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Shaikh, A.R.; Shaikh, A.A.; Abbasi, M.R. Short term outcomes of three dimensional versus two-dimensional laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Pak. J. Med. Sci. 2020, 37, 162–166. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Lee, K.; Youn, S.I.; Won, Y.; Min, S.-H.; Park, Y.S.; Ahn, S.-H.; Park, D.J.; Kim, H.-H. Prospective randomized controlled study for comparison of 2-dimensional versus 3-dimensional laparoscopic distal gastrectomy for gastric adenocarcinoma. Surg. Endosc. 2021, 35, 934–940. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Botteri, E.; Ortenzi, M.; Alemanno, G.; Giordano, A.; Travaglio, E.; Turolo, C.; Castiglioni, S.; Treppiedi, E.; Rosso, E.; Gattolin, A.; et al. Laparoscopic Appendectomy Performed by junior SUrgeonS: Impact of 3D visualization on surgical outcome. Randomized multicentre clinical trial. (LAPSUS TRIAL). Surg. Endosc. 2021, 35, 710–717. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Song, T.; Kang, D.-Y. Three-dimensional versus two-dimensional laparoscopic myomectomy: A randomized controlled trial. Eur. J. Obstet. Gynecol. Reprod. Biol. 2021, 264, 271–275. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Kyriazis, I.; Özsoy, M.; Kallidonis, P.; Vasilas, M.; Panagopoulos, V.; Liatsikos, E. Integrating Three-Dimensional Vision in Laparoscopy: The Learning Curve of an Expert. J. Endourol. 2015, 29, 657–660. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Beattie, K.L.; Hill, A.; Horswill, M.S.; Grove, P.M.; Stevenson, A.R.L. Laparoscopic skills training: The effects of viewing mode (2D vs. 3D) on skill acquisition and transfer. Surg. Endosc. 2021, 35, 4332–4344. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Kunert, W.; Storz, P.; Dietz, N.; Axt, S.; Falch, C.; Kirschniak, A.; Wilhelm, P. Learning curves, potential and speed in training of laparoscopic skills: A randomised comparative study in a box trainer. Surg. Endosc. 2021, 35, 3303–3312. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Zwimpfer, T.A.; Lacher, D.; Fellmann-Fischer, B.; Mueller, M. A laparoscopic study investigating 3D vs 2D imaging systems using a pelvitrainer model with experts, non-experts, and students. BMC Surg. 2020, 20, 276. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mosbrucker, C.; Somani, A.; Dulemba, J. Visualization of endometriosis: Comparative study of 3-dimensional robotic and 2-dimensional laparoscopic endoscopes. J. Robot. Surg. 2018, 12, 59–66. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Parkulo, M.A.; Brinker, T.M.; Bosch, W.; Palaj, A.; DeRuyter, M.L. Risk of SARS-CoV-2 Transmission Among Coworkers in a Surgical Environment. Mayo Clin. Proc. 2021, 96, 152–155. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- De Ruyter, M.L.; A Parkulo, M.; Harris, D.M.; Hedges, M.S.; Brinker, T.M.; Marquez, C.P.; Rubel, N.C.; Simon, F.R.L.; I Logvinov, I.; Li, Z.; et al. Seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in healthcare workers in a surgical environment. Br. J. Surg. 2021, 108, e258–e259. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hadjittofi, C.; Seraj, S.; Uddin, A.; Ali, Z.; Antonas, P.; Fisher, R.; Parekh, K.; Lovett, B.; Ahmad, A. Laparoscopic vs open surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic: What are the risks? Ann. R. Coll. Surg. Engl. 2021, 103, 354–359. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Uecker, J.M.; Fagerberg, A.; Ahmad, N.; Cohen, A.; Gilkey, M.; Alembeigi, F.; Idelson, C.R. Stop the leak: Mitigating potential exposure of aerosolized COVID-19 during laparoscopic surgery. Surg. Endosc. 2021, 35, 493–501. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Bhattacharjee, H.K.; Chaliyadan, S.; Verma, E.; Ramachandran, R.; Makharia, G.; Parshad, R. Coronavirus disease 2019 and laparoscopic surgery in resource-limited settings. Asian J. Endosc. Surg. 2021, 14, 305–308. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Jacob, S.; Hameed, A.; Lam, V.; Pang, T.C. Consistency of global recommendations regarding open versus laparoscopic surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic: A systematic review. ANZ J. Surg. 2021, 91, 1358–1363. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Tang, F.J.; Qi, L.; Jiang, H.C.; Tong, S.Y.; Li, Y. Comparison of the clinical effectiveness of 3D and 2D imaging systems for laparoscopic radical cystectomy with pelvic lymph node dissection. J. Int. Med. Res. 2016, 44, 613–619. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Komaei, I.; Navarra, G.; Currò, G. Three-Dimensional Versus Two-Dimensional Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy: A Systematic Review. J. Laparoendosc. Adv. Surg. Tech. 2017, 27, 790–794. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Ceccarelli, G.; Costa, G.; Ferraro, V.; De Rosa, M.; Rondelli, F.; Bugiantella, W. Robotic or three-dimensional (3D) laparoscopy for right colectomy with complete mesocolic excision (CME) and intracorporeal anastomosis? A propensity score-matching study comparison. Surg. Endosc. 2021, 35, 2039–2048. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Ding, D.; Jiang, H.; Nie, J.; Liu, X.; Guo, S.-W. Concurrent Learning Curves of 3-Dimensional and Robotic-Assisted Laparoscopic Radical Hysterectomy for Early-Stage Cervical Cancer Using 2-Dimensional Laparoscopic Radical Hysterectomy as a Benchmark: A Single Surgeon’s Experience. Med. Sci. Monit. 2019, 25, 5903–5919. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
The Number of People in the Operating Room Should Be Kept to a Minimum. Those Present in the Room Should Be Adequately Experienced to Minimize the Time of the Procedure. |
When using anesthesia equipment, it is recommended to use HEPA filters to minimize the spread of exhaled infectious material by the patient. |
Desuflation should be performed slowly, using HEPA filters to limit excess gas dispersion. |
Tools used during procedures in COVID-19 patients should not be sterilized together with tools used in non-COVID-19 patients. |
In many cases, postponing the procedure to the optimal time should be considered. In the case of endometrial cancer surgery, early surgery increases the number of vascular complications and infections and extends the length of hospital stay. |
Before surgery, PCR tests should be performed, and a chest CT scan should be considered. |
Avoid the spread of blood droplets in the operating room. |
It is worthwhile to carefully secure the access ports for tools against gas leakage. |
It should be remembered that any surgery is associated with immunosuppression, which may increase the risk of infection and the severe course of COVID-19 in the operated patient. |
2D LASH (n = 14) | 3D LASH (n = 14) | p Value | |
---|---|---|---|
Age, year | 56 ± 7.3 | 58 ± 10 | p > 0.05 |
Body mass index, kg/m2 | 26.5 ± 2.3 | 25.8 ± 2.7 | p > 0.05 |
Operative time, min | 90 ± 20 | 70 ± 23 | p = 0.0086 |
Change in serum hemoglobin, g/dL | 1.4 ± 1.3 | 1.6 ± 1.6 | p > 0.05 |
Conversion to open surgery | 1 | 0 | p > 0.05 |
Postoperative complications | 0 | 0 | p > 0.05 |
Length of hospital stay, days | 3 ± 0.2 | 3 ± 0.3 | p > 0.05 |
2D TLH (n = 8) | 3D TLH (n = 8) | p Value | |
Age, year | 62 ± 9.7 | 60 ± 9.2 | p > 0.05 |
Body mass index, kg/m2 | 25.3 ± 3.2 | 25.7 ± 3.7 | p > 0.05 |
Operative time, min | 85 ± 9 | 72 ± 9 | p = 0.0089 |
Change in serum hemoglobin, g/dL | 1.2 ± 1.4 | 1.1 ± 1.3 | p > 0.05 |
Conversion to open surgery | 0 | 0 | p > 0.05 |
Postoperative complications | 0 | 0 | p > 0.05 |
Length of hospital stay, days | 3 ± 0.4 | 3 ± 0.3 | p > 0.05 |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Kowalczyk, D.; Piątkowski, S.; Porażko, M.; Woskowska, A.; Szewczyk, K.; Brudniak, K.; Wójtowicz, M.; Kowalczyk, K. Safety of Three-Dimensional versus Two-Dimensional Laparoscopic Hysterectomy during the COVID-19 Pandemic. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 14163. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph192114163
Kowalczyk D, Piątkowski S, Porażko M, Woskowska A, Szewczyk K, Brudniak K, Wójtowicz M, Kowalczyk K. Safety of Three-Dimensional versus Two-Dimensional Laparoscopic Hysterectomy during the COVID-19 Pandemic. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2022; 19(21):14163. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph192114163
Chicago/Turabian StyleKowalczyk, Dariusz, Szymon Piątkowski, Maja Porażko, Aleksandra Woskowska, Klaudia Szewczyk, Katarzyna Brudniak, Mariusz Wójtowicz, and Karolina Kowalczyk. 2022. "Safety of Three-Dimensional versus Two-Dimensional Laparoscopic Hysterectomy during the COVID-19 Pandemic" International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 19, no. 21: 14163. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph192114163