Raju, Rubin

AbstractObjectiveTo revive the use of the Kahn Uterine Trigger Cannula to overcome limitations associated with technical difficulties during hysterosalpingography (HSG) using the disposable balloon HSG catheter.MethodA case series was conducted of 17 patients who encountered technically difficult or incomplete HSG study while using a disposable HSG balloon catheter, also leading to false‐positive findings. Nine patients underwent a repeat HSG using a Kahn Uterine Trigger Cannula (Group 1). Eight patients underwent diagnostic laparoscopy and tubal perfusion testing using a Kahn Uterine Trigger Cannula (Group 2). The findings for each group in comparison to their initial HSG results using the disposable balloon HSG catheter are described.ResultsAll patients were noted to have patent fallopian tubes using a Kahn Uterine Trigger Cannula on repeat HSG or tubal perfusion testing during laparoscopy.ConclusionProviders who perform HSG studies should be familiar with the value of a Kahn Uterine Trigger Cannula when the traditional use of disposable HSG balloon catheter fails due to technical difficulty or incomplete study. The use of the Kahn Uterine Trigger Cannula in such situations can prevent inaccurate assessment and unnecessary interventions.

Abstract BACKGROUND: It is estimated that one third of women in the United States opt for permanent tubal sterilization at the time of cesarean delivery. Evidence suggests that ovarian cancer begins in the fallopian tubes. Ovarian cancer has the highest mortality of all gynecologic malignancies. There is no proven effective screening for ovarian cancer. In view of this, the Royal College of Obstetricians & Gynecologists and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists recommend considering counseling patients about prophylactic salpingectomy as an effective method of sterilization. There are limited well designed clinical trials that compare the safety and feasibility of total salpingectomy to that of traditional partial salpingectomy for tubal sterilization at the time of cesarean delivery. METHODS: We conducted a non-inferiority randomized controlled trial at the Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota. Women age 21 years and older who were undergoing cesarean delivery and desired concomitant sterilization were enrolled between May 17, 2017 and July 16, 2018. Stratified randomization was performed based on number of previous cesarean deliveries and their Basal Metabolic Index, into a bilateral total salpingectomy group and bilateral partial salpingectomy group. All salpingectomies were performed using clamps and suture. The primary outcome was to compare the mean peri-operative hemoglobin change for both groups. Secondary objectives included sterilization completion time, postoperative length of stay, estimated blood loss, postoperative pain and adverse events. RESULTS: Of the 111 women screened, 40 were enrolled and randomized. Of these, 38 underwent the assigned procedure (18 BTS, 20 BPS). There were no demographic differences between groups. No difference in Mean ±SD hemoglobin drop between groups (1.4±0.7 g/dl for the BTS group and 1.8±1.0 g/dl for the BPS group, p=0.08). Mean time to completion of sterilization procedure was significantly longer in the BTS group (16.3±5.6 minutes for the BTS group vs 5.1±1.6 minutes for the BPS group, p < .01). No significant differences for other outcome measures.CONCLUSIONS: Bilateral total salpingectomy at the time of cesarean delivery does not increase the risk for blood loss and has similar peri-operative outcomes, with a small increase in operative time when compared to traditional bilateral partial salpingectomy. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03135431, 27/04/2017

Objective To compare the perioperative outcomes of transvaginal/perineal and abdominal approaches to rectovaginal fistula (RVF) repair using a national multicenter cohort. Methods The American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database was utilized to identify women undergoing RVF repair from 2005 to 2016. Emergent cases and those with concomitant bowel diversion were excluded. Baseline patient demographics, procedure characteristics, 30-day postoperative complications, return to the operating room, and readmission were evaluated. Baseline characteristics were compared across surgical approach. Multivariable logistic regression models identified preoperative characteristics independently associated with postoperative complications. Results A total of 2288 women underwent RVF repair: 1560 (68.2%) via transvaginal/perineal approach and 728 (31.8%) via abdominal approach. Patients undergoing transvaginal/perineal repair were significantly younger (median age, 46 years vs 63 years), with lower American Society for Anesthesiologist (ASA) scores, and less frequency of diabetes mellitus, dyspnea, severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, hypertension, disseminated cancer, and bleeding disorders (all P < 0.01). Those undergoing abdominal repair had higher rates of major complications (25.8% vs 8.7%), minor complications (13.5% vs 6.3%), and readmission (13.2% vs 7.8%). On multivariable analyses, ASA Class 3/4, disseminated cancer, and hematocrit <30% ( P < 0.01) were associated with major complications in both groups. Conclusions Patients undergoing RVF repair via abdominal approach were older with more comorbidities and had higher postoperative complications rates, likely secondary to underlying differences in the treated populations. Irrespective of surgical approach, ASA class, disseminated cancer, and preoperative anemia were associated with higher postoperative morbidity. This may enhance preoperative counseling and allow for careful patient selection.