Background: Deep Endometriosis (DE) classification studies with Enzian never compared solitary (A, B, C, F), and combinations of anatomical locations (A&B, A&C, B&C, A&B&C), in... Show moreBackground: Deep Endometriosis (DE) classification studies with Enzian never compared solitary (A, B, C, F), and combinations of anatomical locations (A&B, A&C, B&C, A&B&C), in correlation to pain. Therefore, the results of these studies are challenging to translate to the clinical situation.Objectives: We studied pain symptoms and their correlation with the solitary and combinations of anatomical locations of deep endometriosis lesion(s) classified by the Enzian score.Materials and Methods: A prospective multi-centre study was conducted with data from university and non -university hospitals. A total of 419 surgical DE cases were collected with the web-based application called EQUSUM (www.equsum.org).Main outcome measures: Preoperative reported numeric rating scale (NRS) were collected along with the Enzian classification. Baseline characteristics, pain scores, surgical procedure and extent of the disease were also collected.Results: In general, more extensive involvement of DE does not lead to an increase in the numerical rating scale for pain measures. However, dysuria and bladder involvement do show a clear correlation AUC 0.62 (SE 0.04, CI 0.54-0.71, p< 0.01). Regarding the predictive value of dyschezia, we found a weak, but significant correlation with ureteric involvement; AUC 0.60 (SE 0.04, CI 0.53-0.67, p< 0.01).Conclusions:TPain symptoms poorly correlate with anatomical locations of deep endometriosis in almost all pain scores, with the exception of bladder involvement and dysuria which did show a correlation. Also, dyschezia seems to have predictive value for DE ureteric involvement and therefore MRI or ultrasound imaging (ureter and kidney) could be recommended in the preoperative workup of these patients.What's new? Dyschezia might have a predictive value in detecting ureteric involvement. Show less
Metzemaekers, J.; Akker-van Marle, M.E. van den; Sampat, J.; Smeets, M.J.G.H.; English, J.; Thijs, E.; ... ; Essers, B. 2021
Objective To study the preferences of women with deep endometriosis (DE) with bowel involvement when they have to choose between conservative (medication) or surgical treatment. Design Labelled... Show moreObjective To study the preferences of women with deep endometriosis (DE) with bowel involvement when they have to choose between conservative (medication) or surgical treatment. Design Labelled discrete choice experiment (DCE). Setting Dutch academic and non-academic hospitals and online recruitment. Population or Sample A total of 169 women diagnosed with DE of the bowel. Methods Baseline characteristics and the fear of surgery were collected. Women were asked to rank attributes and choose between hypothetical conservative or surgical treatment in different choice sets (scenarios). Each choice set offered different levels of all treatment attributes. Data were analysed by using multinomial logistic regression. Main Outcome Measures The following attributes - effect on/risk of pain, fatigue, pregnancy, endometriosis lesions, mood swings, osteoporosis, temporary stoma and permanent intestinal symptoms - were used in this DCE. Results In the ranking, osteoporosis was ranked with low importance, whereas in the DCE, a lower chance of osteoporosis was one of the most important drivers when choosing a conservative treatment. Women with previous surgery showed less fear of surgery compared with women without surgery. Low anterior resection syndrome was almost equally important for patients as the chance of pain reduction. Pain reduction had higher importance than improving fertility chances, even in women with desire for a future child. Conclusions The risk of developing low anterior resection syndrome as a result of treatment is almost equally important as the reduction of pain symptoms. Women with previous surgery experience less fear of surgery compared with women without a surgical history. Tweetable Abstract First discrete choice experiment in patients with deep endometriosis. Show less
Objective: To study the experiences, considerations, and motivations of patients with endometriosis in the decision-making process for deep endometriosis (DE) treatment options.Design: Qualitative... Show moreObjective: To study the experiences, considerations, and motivations of patients with endometriosis in the decision-making process for deep endometriosis (DE) treatment options.Design: Qualitative study using semi-structured in-depth focus group methodology.Setting: University medical center.Patient(s): A total of 19 Dutch women diagnosed with DE between 27 and 47 years of age.Intervention(s): Not applicable.Main Outcome Measure(s): Focus group topics were disease impact and motives for treatment, expectations of the treatment process, and important factors in the decision process.Result(s): Women reported that pain, fertility, and strong fear of complications are important decisive factors in the treatment process. The goal of conceiving a child is considered important, however, sometimes doctors emphasize this topic too much. It emerged that complication counseling is frequently about surgical complications, whereas side effects of hormonal treatments are neglected. Shared decisionmaking and information about treatment options, complications, and side effects are not always optimal, making it difficult to make a well-considered choice. Despitenegative experiences encountered after surgery, the positive effect of surgery ensures that mostwomendonot regret their choice.Conclusion(s): In the treatment decision process for patients with DE, pain is almost always the most important decisive factor. The wish to conceive and strong fear of complications can change this choice. Doctors should understand the importance of fertility for the majority of women, but, also, if this is not considered paramount, respect that view. To improve shared decision making, exploration of treatment goals, training of healthcare providers, and better patient information provision are desirable. (C) 2020 by American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Show less
Background: To evaluate the implementation and maintenance of advanced laparoscopic skills after a structured mentorship program in laparoscopic hysterectomy (LH). Methods: Cohort retrospective... Show moreBackground: To evaluate the implementation and maintenance of advanced laparoscopic skills after a structured mentorship program in laparoscopic hysterectomy (LH). Methods: Cohort retrospective analysis of 104 successive LHs performed by two gynecologists during and after a mentorship program. LHs were compared for indication, patient characteristics and intraoperative characteristics. As a frame of reference, 94 LHs performed by the mentor were analyzed. Results: With regard to indication, blood loss and adverse outcomes, both trainees performed LHs during their mentorship program comparable with the LHs performed by the mentor. The difference in mean operating time between trainees and mentor was not clinically significant. Both trainees progressed along a learning curve, while operating time remained statistically constant and comparable to that of the mentor. After completing the mentorship program, both gynecologists maintained their acquired skills as blood loss, adverse outcome rates and operating time were comparable with the results during their traineeship. Conclusion: A mentorship program is an effective and durable tool for implementing a new surgical procedure in a teaching hospital with respect to patient safety aspects, as indications, operating time and adverse outcome rates are comparable to those of the mentor in his own hospital during and after completing the mentorship program. Copyright (C) 2010 S. Karger AG, Basel Show less
