Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 5, 2025
Introduction of Intracapsular Rotary-cut Procedures IRCP: A Modified Hysteromyomectomy Procedures Facilitating Fertility Preservation
Published on: January 17, 2019
The Impact of Minimally Invasive Gynecologic Surgery Subspecialty Training on Outcomes of Myomectomy: A Retrospective
Rebecca J Schneyer1, Raanan Meyer2, Margot L Barker1
1Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center (Schneyer, Meyer, Barker, Hamilton, Siedhoff, Truong, and Wright), Los Angeles, California.
Study Objective:
To compare surgical outcomes among patients undergoing minimally invasive myomectomy (MIM) or abdominal myomectomy (AM) with MIGS subspecialists versus general obstetrician/gynecologists (OB/GYNs), and to characterize the complexity of myomectomies by surgeon type.
Design:
Retrospective cohort study.
Setting:
Quaternary care institution.
Participants:
Patients who underwent MIM (laparoscopic or robotic) or AM with a fellowship-trained MIGS subspecialist or general OB/GYN from March 15, 2015 to March 14, 2020.
Interventions:
Myomectomy.
Results:
Of 609 myomectomies, 460 (75.5%) were MIM, 404 (87.8%) of which were performed by MIGS subspecialists. The remaining 149 (24.5%) cases were AM, 36 (24.1%) of which were performed by MIGS subspecialists. Compared to general OB/GYNs, MIGS subspecialists excised a greater number of fibroids for both MIM (median 3.0 [range 1.0-30.0] vs 2.0 [1.0-9.0], p <.001) and AM (21.0 [10.0-60.0] vs 6.0 [1.0-42.0], p <.001), and had a greater proportion of uteri >20 weeks size for AM (22.2% vs 3.5%, p = .003). Composite perioperative complication rates were significantly higher for general OB/GYNs than for MIGS subspecialists (29.0% vs 11.8%, adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 2.70, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.48-4.92). In a subgroup analysis of MIM only, general OB/GYNs had higher rates of composite perioperative complications (28.6% vs 9.9%, aOR 4.51, 95% CI 2.27-8.97), excessive blood loss and/or transfusion (10.7% vs 3.0%, unadjusted odds ratio [OR] 3.92, 95% CI 1.41-10.91), surgery time ≥ 90th percentile (25.0% vs 8.9%, aOR 5.05, 95% CI 2.39-10.64), and conversions to laparotomy (10.7% vs 0.2%, unadjusted OR 48.36, 95% CI 5.71-409.93). For AM only, there were no significant differences in perioperative complication rates between groups.
Conclusion:
Fellowship-trained MIGS subspecialists had improved surgical outcomes for MIM compared to general OB/GYNs, with fewer conversions to laparotomy, reduced surgery time, and less blood loss, while outcomes for AM were similar by surgeon type. MIGS subspecialists excised a greater number of fibroids regardless of surgical approach, highlighting a level of comfort in complex benign gynecology beyond endoscopic surgery at our institution.
More Related Videos
11:29Surgical Techniques to Optimize Ovarian Reserve during Laparoscopic Cystectomy for Ovarian Endometrioma
Published on: January 22, 2022
03:01Author Spotlight: A Reproductive Hysteroscopy Approach for Complete Endometrial Polyp Removal and Enhanced Endometrial Receptivity
Published on: August 2, 2024