Excision of abdominal wall endometriosis

Article Type
Changed
Thu, 06/06/2019 - 16:17

Endometriosis, defined by the ectopic growth of functioning endometrial glands and stroma,1,2 usually affects the peritoneal cavity. However, endometriosis has been identified in the pneumothorax, brain, and within the extraperitoneum, such as the abdominal wall.1-3 Incidence of abdominal wall endometriosis can be up to 12%.3-5 If patients report symptoms, they can include abdominal pain, a palpable mass, pelvic pain consistent with endometriosis, and bleeding from involvement of the overlying skin. Abdominal wall endometriosis can be surgically resected, with complete resolution and a low rate of recurrence.

In the following video, we review the diagnosis of abdominal wall endometriosis, including our imaging of choice, and treatment options. In addition, we illustrate a surgical technique for the excision of abdominal wall endometriosis in a 38-year-old patient with symptomatic disease. We conclude with a review of key surgical steps.

We hope that you find this video useful to your clinical practice.
>> Dr. Arnold P. Advincula, and colleagues

Vidyard Video

References
  1. Burney RO, Giudice LC. Pathogenesis and pathophysiology of endometriosis. Fertil Steril. 2012;98:511-519.
  2. Ecker AM, Donnellan NM, Shepherd JP, et al. Abdominal wall endometriosis: 12 years of experience at a large academic institution. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2014;211:363.e1-e5.
  3. Horton JD, Dezee KJ, Ahnfeldt EP, et al. Abdominal wall endometriosis: a surgeon’s perspective and review of 445 cases. Am J Surg. 2008;196:207-212.
  4. Ding Y, Zhu J. A retrospective review of abdominal wall endometriosis in Shanghai, China. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2013;121:41-44.
  5. Chang Y, Tsai EM, Long CY, et al. Abdominal wall endometriosis. J Reproductive Med. 2009;54:155-159.
Article PDF
Author and Disclosure Information

Dr. Arora is Minimally Invasive Gynecologic Surgery Fellow, Division of Gynecologic Specialty Surgery, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Columbia University Medical Center/New York–Presbyterian Hospital, New York.

Dr. Mattingly is Program Director, Minimally Invasive Gynecologic Surgery, Novant Health Pelvic Health & Surgery, Charlotte, North Carolina.

Dr. Advincula is Levine Family Professor of Women’s Health; Vice-Chair, Department of Obstetrics & Gynecology; Chief of Gynecology, Sloane Hospital for Women; and Medical Director, Mary & Michael Jaharis Simulation Center, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York-Presbyterian Hospital. He serves on the OBG MANAGEMENT Board of Editors.

Dr. Kim is Assistant Professor of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Division of Gynecologic Specialty Surgery, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Columbia University Irving Medical Center/New York-Presbyterian Hospital. 

Dr. Arora reports receiving grant or research support from Applied Medical, CooperSurgical, and Medtronic (in-kind equipment grant).

Dr. Mattingly reports no financial relationships relevant to this video.

Dr. Advincula reports serving as a consultant to AbbVie, ConMed, CooperSurgical, Intuitive Surgical, and Titan Medical and receiving royalties from CooperSurgical.

Dr. Kim reports serving as a consultant to AbbVie and Intuitive.

Issue
OBG Management - 31(6)
Publications
Topics
Page Number
C3
Sections
Author and Disclosure Information

Dr. Arora is Minimally Invasive Gynecologic Surgery Fellow, Division of Gynecologic Specialty Surgery, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Columbia University Medical Center/New York–Presbyterian Hospital, New York.

Dr. Mattingly is Program Director, Minimally Invasive Gynecologic Surgery, Novant Health Pelvic Health & Surgery, Charlotte, North Carolina.

Dr. Advincula is Levine Family Professor of Women’s Health; Vice-Chair, Department of Obstetrics & Gynecology; Chief of Gynecology, Sloane Hospital for Women; and Medical Director, Mary & Michael Jaharis Simulation Center, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York-Presbyterian Hospital. He serves on the OBG MANAGEMENT Board of Editors.

Dr. Kim is Assistant Professor of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Division of Gynecologic Specialty Surgery, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Columbia University Irving Medical Center/New York-Presbyterian Hospital. 

Dr. Arora reports receiving grant or research support from Applied Medical, CooperSurgical, and Medtronic (in-kind equipment grant).

Dr. Mattingly reports no financial relationships relevant to this video.

Dr. Advincula reports serving as a consultant to AbbVie, ConMed, CooperSurgical, Intuitive Surgical, and Titan Medical and receiving royalties from CooperSurgical.

Dr. Kim reports serving as a consultant to AbbVie and Intuitive.

Author and Disclosure Information

Dr. Arora is Minimally Invasive Gynecologic Surgery Fellow, Division of Gynecologic Specialty Surgery, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Columbia University Medical Center/New York–Presbyterian Hospital, New York.

Dr. Mattingly is Program Director, Minimally Invasive Gynecologic Surgery, Novant Health Pelvic Health & Surgery, Charlotte, North Carolina.

Dr. Advincula is Levine Family Professor of Women’s Health; Vice-Chair, Department of Obstetrics & Gynecology; Chief of Gynecology, Sloane Hospital for Women; and Medical Director, Mary & Michael Jaharis Simulation Center, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York-Presbyterian Hospital. He serves on the OBG MANAGEMENT Board of Editors.

Dr. Kim is Assistant Professor of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Division of Gynecologic Specialty Surgery, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Columbia University Irving Medical Center/New York-Presbyterian Hospital. 

Dr. Arora reports receiving grant or research support from Applied Medical, CooperSurgical, and Medtronic (in-kind equipment grant).

Dr. Mattingly reports no financial relationships relevant to this video.

Dr. Advincula reports serving as a consultant to AbbVie, ConMed, CooperSurgical, Intuitive Surgical, and Titan Medical and receiving royalties from CooperSurgical.

Dr. Kim reports serving as a consultant to AbbVie and Intuitive.

Article PDF
Article PDF

Endometriosis, defined by the ectopic growth of functioning endometrial glands and stroma,1,2 usually affects the peritoneal cavity. However, endometriosis has been identified in the pneumothorax, brain, and within the extraperitoneum, such as the abdominal wall.1-3 Incidence of abdominal wall endometriosis can be up to 12%.3-5 If patients report symptoms, they can include abdominal pain, a palpable mass, pelvic pain consistent with endometriosis, and bleeding from involvement of the overlying skin. Abdominal wall endometriosis can be surgically resected, with complete resolution and a low rate of recurrence.

In the following video, we review the diagnosis of abdominal wall endometriosis, including our imaging of choice, and treatment options. In addition, we illustrate a surgical technique for the excision of abdominal wall endometriosis in a 38-year-old patient with symptomatic disease. We conclude with a review of key surgical steps.

We hope that you find this video useful to your clinical practice.
>> Dr. Arnold P. Advincula, and colleagues

Vidyard Video

Endometriosis, defined by the ectopic growth of functioning endometrial glands and stroma,1,2 usually affects the peritoneal cavity. However, endometriosis has been identified in the pneumothorax, brain, and within the extraperitoneum, such as the abdominal wall.1-3 Incidence of abdominal wall endometriosis can be up to 12%.3-5 If patients report symptoms, they can include abdominal pain, a palpable mass, pelvic pain consistent with endometriosis, and bleeding from involvement of the overlying skin. Abdominal wall endometriosis can be surgically resected, with complete resolution and a low rate of recurrence.

In the following video, we review the diagnosis of abdominal wall endometriosis, including our imaging of choice, and treatment options. In addition, we illustrate a surgical technique for the excision of abdominal wall endometriosis in a 38-year-old patient with symptomatic disease. We conclude with a review of key surgical steps.

We hope that you find this video useful to your clinical practice.
>> Dr. Arnold P. Advincula, and colleagues

Vidyard Video

References
  1. Burney RO, Giudice LC. Pathogenesis and pathophysiology of endometriosis. Fertil Steril. 2012;98:511-519.
  2. Ecker AM, Donnellan NM, Shepherd JP, et al. Abdominal wall endometriosis: 12 years of experience at a large academic institution. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2014;211:363.e1-e5.
  3. Horton JD, Dezee KJ, Ahnfeldt EP, et al. Abdominal wall endometriosis: a surgeon’s perspective and review of 445 cases. Am J Surg. 2008;196:207-212.
  4. Ding Y, Zhu J. A retrospective review of abdominal wall endometriosis in Shanghai, China. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2013;121:41-44.
  5. Chang Y, Tsai EM, Long CY, et al. Abdominal wall endometriosis. J Reproductive Med. 2009;54:155-159.
References
  1. Burney RO, Giudice LC. Pathogenesis and pathophysiology of endometriosis. Fertil Steril. 2012;98:511-519.
  2. Ecker AM, Donnellan NM, Shepherd JP, et al. Abdominal wall endometriosis: 12 years of experience at a large academic institution. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2014;211:363.e1-e5.
  3. Horton JD, Dezee KJ, Ahnfeldt EP, et al. Abdominal wall endometriosis: a surgeon’s perspective and review of 445 cases. Am J Surg. 2008;196:207-212.
  4. Ding Y, Zhu J. A retrospective review of abdominal wall endometriosis in Shanghai, China. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2013;121:41-44.
  5. Chang Y, Tsai EM, Long CY, et al. Abdominal wall endometriosis. J Reproductive Med. 2009;54:155-159.
Issue
OBG Management - 31(6)
Issue
OBG Management - 31(6)
Page Number
C3
Page Number
C3
Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Gate On Date
Tue, 05/28/2019 - 13:30
Un-Gate On Date
Tue, 05/28/2019 - 13:30
Use ProPublica
CFC Schedule Remove Status
Tue, 05/28/2019 - 13:30
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.
Article PDF Media

Minilaparotomy: Minimally invasive approach to abdominal myomectomy

Article Type
Changed
Mon, 06/10/2019 - 16:05
Display Headline
Minilaparotomy: Minimally invasive approach to abdominal myomectomy

A minilaparotomy is loosely defined as a laparotomy measuring between 4 cm and 6 cm. For the appropriate surgical candidate, a minilaparotomy is a useful alternative to laparotomy or laparoscopy, especially for large pathology.1 Benefits of minilaparotomy include improved pain management and postoperative recovery, as well as improved cosmetic outcome, with comparable blood loss and operative time.2,3

Vidyard Video

 In this video, we illustrate the key surgical steps of a minilaparotomy for the removal of large fibroids. These steps include:

  1. strategic vertical skin incision
  2. use of a self-retaining retractor
  3. infiltrate myometrium with dilute vasopressin
  4. strategic hysterotomy
  5. use of tenaculum for upward traction
  6. 10# blade scalpels for the “lemon wedge” coring technique
  7. layered closure.

Minilaparotomy myomectomy can be an excellent minimally invasive alternative to a traditional “full laparotomy” for women with large fibroids.

We hope that you find this video beneficial to your clinical practice.

>> Arnold P. Advincula, MD
 

WATCH FOR THIS VIDEO COMING SOON:

Laparoscopic bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy via minilaparotomy assistance for the massively enlarged adnexal mass

References
  1. Pelosi MA 2nd, Pelosi MA 3rd. Pelosi minilaparotomy hysterectomy: a non-endoscopic minimally invasive alternative to laparoscopy and laparotomy. Surg Technol Int. 2004;13:157-167.
  2. Fanafani F, Fagotti A, Longo R. Minilaparotomy in the management of benign gynecologic disease. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2005;119:232-236.
  3. Glasser MH. Minilaparotomy: a minimally invasive alternative for major gynecologic abdominal surgery. Perm J. 2005;9:41-45.
Article PDF
Author and Disclosure Information

Dr. Seaman is Resident, Department of Obstetrics & Gynecology, Columbia University Medical Center, New York-Presbyterian Hospital, New York, NY.

Dr. Mattingly is Program Director, Minimally Invasive Gynecologic Surgery, Novant Health Pelvic Health & Surgery, Charlotte, North Carolina.

Dr. Advincula is Levine Family Professor of Women’s Health; Vice-Chair, Department of Obstetrics & Gynecology; Chief of Gynecology, Sloane Hospital for Women; and Medical Director, Mary & Michael Jaharis Simulation Center, Columbia University Medical Center, New York-Presbyterian Hospital. He serves on the OBG Management Board of Editors.

Dr. Advincula reports serving as a consultant to ConMed, CooperSurgical, Intuitive Surgical, and Titan Medical and receiving royalties from CooperSurgical. The other authors report no financial relationships relevant to this article.

Issue
OBG Management - 31(3)
Publications
Topics
Page Number
52
Sections
Author and Disclosure Information

Dr. Seaman is Resident, Department of Obstetrics & Gynecology, Columbia University Medical Center, New York-Presbyterian Hospital, New York, NY.

Dr. Mattingly is Program Director, Minimally Invasive Gynecologic Surgery, Novant Health Pelvic Health & Surgery, Charlotte, North Carolina.

Dr. Advincula is Levine Family Professor of Women’s Health; Vice-Chair, Department of Obstetrics & Gynecology; Chief of Gynecology, Sloane Hospital for Women; and Medical Director, Mary & Michael Jaharis Simulation Center, Columbia University Medical Center, New York-Presbyterian Hospital. He serves on the OBG Management Board of Editors.

Dr. Advincula reports serving as a consultant to ConMed, CooperSurgical, Intuitive Surgical, and Titan Medical and receiving royalties from CooperSurgical. The other authors report no financial relationships relevant to this article.

Author and Disclosure Information

Dr. Seaman is Resident, Department of Obstetrics & Gynecology, Columbia University Medical Center, New York-Presbyterian Hospital, New York, NY.

Dr. Mattingly is Program Director, Minimally Invasive Gynecologic Surgery, Novant Health Pelvic Health & Surgery, Charlotte, North Carolina.

Dr. Advincula is Levine Family Professor of Women’s Health; Vice-Chair, Department of Obstetrics & Gynecology; Chief of Gynecology, Sloane Hospital for Women; and Medical Director, Mary & Michael Jaharis Simulation Center, Columbia University Medical Center, New York-Presbyterian Hospital. He serves on the OBG Management Board of Editors.

Dr. Advincula reports serving as a consultant to ConMed, CooperSurgical, Intuitive Surgical, and Titan Medical and receiving royalties from CooperSurgical. The other authors report no financial relationships relevant to this article.

Article PDF
Article PDF

A minilaparotomy is loosely defined as a laparotomy measuring between 4 cm and 6 cm. For the appropriate surgical candidate, a minilaparotomy is a useful alternative to laparotomy or laparoscopy, especially for large pathology.1 Benefits of minilaparotomy include improved pain management and postoperative recovery, as well as improved cosmetic outcome, with comparable blood loss and operative time.2,3

Vidyard Video

 In this video, we illustrate the key surgical steps of a minilaparotomy for the removal of large fibroids. These steps include:

  1. strategic vertical skin incision
  2. use of a self-retaining retractor
  3. infiltrate myometrium with dilute vasopressin
  4. strategic hysterotomy
  5. use of tenaculum for upward traction
  6. 10# blade scalpels for the “lemon wedge” coring technique
  7. layered closure.

Minilaparotomy myomectomy can be an excellent minimally invasive alternative to a traditional “full laparotomy” for women with large fibroids.

We hope that you find this video beneficial to your clinical practice.

>> Arnold P. Advincula, MD
 

WATCH FOR THIS VIDEO COMING SOON:

Laparoscopic bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy via minilaparotomy assistance for the massively enlarged adnexal mass

A minilaparotomy is loosely defined as a laparotomy measuring between 4 cm and 6 cm. For the appropriate surgical candidate, a minilaparotomy is a useful alternative to laparotomy or laparoscopy, especially for large pathology.1 Benefits of minilaparotomy include improved pain management and postoperative recovery, as well as improved cosmetic outcome, with comparable blood loss and operative time.2,3

Vidyard Video

 In this video, we illustrate the key surgical steps of a minilaparotomy for the removal of large fibroids. These steps include:

  1. strategic vertical skin incision
  2. use of a self-retaining retractor
  3. infiltrate myometrium with dilute vasopressin
  4. strategic hysterotomy
  5. use of tenaculum for upward traction
  6. 10# blade scalpels for the “lemon wedge” coring technique
  7. layered closure.

Minilaparotomy myomectomy can be an excellent minimally invasive alternative to a traditional “full laparotomy” for women with large fibroids.

We hope that you find this video beneficial to your clinical practice.

>> Arnold P. Advincula, MD
 

WATCH FOR THIS VIDEO COMING SOON:

Laparoscopic bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy via minilaparotomy assistance for the massively enlarged adnexal mass

References
  1. Pelosi MA 2nd, Pelosi MA 3rd. Pelosi minilaparotomy hysterectomy: a non-endoscopic minimally invasive alternative to laparoscopy and laparotomy. Surg Technol Int. 2004;13:157-167.
  2. Fanafani F, Fagotti A, Longo R. Minilaparotomy in the management of benign gynecologic disease. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2005;119:232-236.
  3. Glasser MH. Minilaparotomy: a minimally invasive alternative for major gynecologic abdominal surgery. Perm J. 2005;9:41-45.
References
  1. Pelosi MA 2nd, Pelosi MA 3rd. Pelosi minilaparotomy hysterectomy: a non-endoscopic minimally invasive alternative to laparoscopy and laparotomy. Surg Technol Int. 2004;13:157-167.
  2. Fanafani F, Fagotti A, Longo R. Minilaparotomy in the management of benign gynecologic disease. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2005;119:232-236.
  3. Glasser MH. Minilaparotomy: a minimally invasive alternative for major gynecologic abdominal surgery. Perm J. 2005;9:41-45.
Issue
OBG Management - 31(3)
Issue
OBG Management - 31(3)
Page Number
52
Page Number
52
Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Display Headline
Minilaparotomy: Minimally invasive approach to abdominal myomectomy
Display Headline
Minilaparotomy: Minimally invasive approach to abdominal myomectomy
Sections
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Gate On Date
Wed, 02/27/2019 - 14:30
Un-Gate On Date
Wed, 02/27/2019 - 14:30
Use ProPublica
CFC Schedule Remove Status
Wed, 02/27/2019 - 14:30
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.
Article PDF Media

Robot-assisted laparoscopic tubal anastomosis following sterilization

Article Type
Changed
Wed, 01/02/2019 - 10:15
Display Headline
Robot-assisted laparoscopic tubal anastomosis following sterilization
Vidyard Video

 

Female sterilization is the most common method of contraception worldwide, and the second most common contraceptive method used in the United States. Approximately 643,000 sterilization procedures are performed annually.1 Approximately 1% to 3% of women who undergo sterilization will subsequently undergo a sterilization reversal.2 Although multiple variables have been identified, change in marital status is the most commonly cited reason for desiring a tubal reversal.3,4 Tubal anastomosis can be a technically challenging surgical procedure when done by laparoscopy, especially given the microsurgical elements that are required. Several modifications, including limiting the number of sutures, have evolved as a result of its tedious nature.5 By leveraging 3D magnification, articulating instruments, and tremor filtration, it is only natural that robotic surgery has been applied to tubal anastomosis.

In this video, we review some background information surrounding a tubal reversal, followed by demonstration of a robotic interpretation of a 2-stitch anastomosis technique in a patient who successfully conceived and delivered.6 Overall robot-assisted laparoscopic tubal anastomosis is a feasible and safe option for women who desire reversal of surgical sterilization, with pregnancy and live-birth rates comparable to those observed when an open technique is utilized.7 I hope that you will find this video beneficial to your clinical practice.

References
  1. Chan LM, Westhoff CL. Tubal sterilization trends in the United States. Fertil Steril. 2010;94:1-6.
  2. Moss CC. Sterilization: a review and update. Obstet Gynecol Clin North Am. 2015-12-01;42:713-724.
  3. Gordts S, Campo R, Puttemans P, Gordts S. Clinical factors determining pregnancy outcome after microsurgical tubal anastomosis. Fertil Steril. 2009;92:1198-1202.
  4. Chi I-C, Jones DB. Incidence, risk factors, and prevention of poststerilization regret in women. Obstet Gynecol Surv. 1994;49:722-732.
  5. Dubuisson JB, Swolin K. Laparoscopic tubal anastomosis (the one stitch technique): preliminary results. Human Reprod. 1995;10:2044-2046.
  6. Bissonnette FCA, Lapensee L, Bouzayen R. Outpatient laparoscopic tubal anastomosis and subsequent fertility. Fertil Steril. 1999;72:549-552.
  7. Caillet M, Vandromme J, Rozenberg S, Paesmans M, Germay O, Degueldre M. Robotically assisted laparoscopic microsurgical tubal anastomosis: a retrospective study. Fertil Steril. 2010;94:1844-1847.
Author and Disclosure Information

Dr. Mattingly is Program Director, Minimally Invasive Gynecologic Surgery, Novant Health Pelvic Health & Surgery, Charlotte, North Carolina.

Dr. Gumer is from Columbia University Medical Center, New York-Presbyterian Hospital.

Dr. Advincula is Levine Family Professor of Women’s Health; Vice-Chair, Department of Obstetrics & Gynecology; Chief of Gynecology, Sloane Hospital for Women; and Medical Director, Mary & Michael Jaharis Simulation Center, Columbia University Medical Center,
New York-Presbyterian Hospital. He serves on the OBG MANAGEMENT Board of Editors.

Dr. Advincula reports serving as a consultant to ConMed, CooperSurgical, Intuitive Surgical, and Titan Medical and receiving royalties from CooperSurgical. The other authors report no financial relationships relevant to this article.

Issue
OBG Management - 30(11)
Publications
Topics
Sections
Author and Disclosure Information

Dr. Mattingly is Program Director, Minimally Invasive Gynecologic Surgery, Novant Health Pelvic Health & Surgery, Charlotte, North Carolina.

Dr. Gumer is from Columbia University Medical Center, New York-Presbyterian Hospital.

Dr. Advincula is Levine Family Professor of Women’s Health; Vice-Chair, Department of Obstetrics & Gynecology; Chief of Gynecology, Sloane Hospital for Women; and Medical Director, Mary & Michael Jaharis Simulation Center, Columbia University Medical Center,
New York-Presbyterian Hospital. He serves on the OBG MANAGEMENT Board of Editors.

Dr. Advincula reports serving as a consultant to ConMed, CooperSurgical, Intuitive Surgical, and Titan Medical and receiving royalties from CooperSurgical. The other authors report no financial relationships relevant to this article.

Author and Disclosure Information

Dr. Mattingly is Program Director, Minimally Invasive Gynecologic Surgery, Novant Health Pelvic Health & Surgery, Charlotte, North Carolina.

Dr. Gumer is from Columbia University Medical Center, New York-Presbyterian Hospital.

Dr. Advincula is Levine Family Professor of Women’s Health; Vice-Chair, Department of Obstetrics & Gynecology; Chief of Gynecology, Sloane Hospital for Women; and Medical Director, Mary & Michael Jaharis Simulation Center, Columbia University Medical Center,
New York-Presbyterian Hospital. He serves on the OBG MANAGEMENT Board of Editors.

Dr. Advincula reports serving as a consultant to ConMed, CooperSurgical, Intuitive Surgical, and Titan Medical and receiving royalties from CooperSurgical. The other authors report no financial relationships relevant to this article.

Related Articles
Vidyard Video

 

Female sterilization is the most common method of contraception worldwide, and the second most common contraceptive method used in the United States. Approximately 643,000 sterilization procedures are performed annually.1 Approximately 1% to 3% of women who undergo sterilization will subsequently undergo a sterilization reversal.2 Although multiple variables have been identified, change in marital status is the most commonly cited reason for desiring a tubal reversal.3,4 Tubal anastomosis can be a technically challenging surgical procedure when done by laparoscopy, especially given the microsurgical elements that are required. Several modifications, including limiting the number of sutures, have evolved as a result of its tedious nature.5 By leveraging 3D magnification, articulating instruments, and tremor filtration, it is only natural that robotic surgery has been applied to tubal anastomosis.

In this video, we review some background information surrounding a tubal reversal, followed by demonstration of a robotic interpretation of a 2-stitch anastomosis technique in a patient who successfully conceived and delivered.6 Overall robot-assisted laparoscopic tubal anastomosis is a feasible and safe option for women who desire reversal of surgical sterilization, with pregnancy and live-birth rates comparable to those observed when an open technique is utilized.7 I hope that you will find this video beneficial to your clinical practice.

Vidyard Video

 

Female sterilization is the most common method of contraception worldwide, and the second most common contraceptive method used in the United States. Approximately 643,000 sterilization procedures are performed annually.1 Approximately 1% to 3% of women who undergo sterilization will subsequently undergo a sterilization reversal.2 Although multiple variables have been identified, change in marital status is the most commonly cited reason for desiring a tubal reversal.3,4 Tubal anastomosis can be a technically challenging surgical procedure when done by laparoscopy, especially given the microsurgical elements that are required. Several modifications, including limiting the number of sutures, have evolved as a result of its tedious nature.5 By leveraging 3D magnification, articulating instruments, and tremor filtration, it is only natural that robotic surgery has been applied to tubal anastomosis.

In this video, we review some background information surrounding a tubal reversal, followed by demonstration of a robotic interpretation of a 2-stitch anastomosis technique in a patient who successfully conceived and delivered.6 Overall robot-assisted laparoscopic tubal anastomosis is a feasible and safe option for women who desire reversal of surgical sterilization, with pregnancy and live-birth rates comparable to those observed when an open technique is utilized.7 I hope that you will find this video beneficial to your clinical practice.

References
  1. Chan LM, Westhoff CL. Tubal sterilization trends in the United States. Fertil Steril. 2010;94:1-6.
  2. Moss CC. Sterilization: a review and update. Obstet Gynecol Clin North Am. 2015-12-01;42:713-724.
  3. Gordts S, Campo R, Puttemans P, Gordts S. Clinical factors determining pregnancy outcome after microsurgical tubal anastomosis. Fertil Steril. 2009;92:1198-1202.
  4. Chi I-C, Jones DB. Incidence, risk factors, and prevention of poststerilization regret in women. Obstet Gynecol Surv. 1994;49:722-732.
  5. Dubuisson JB, Swolin K. Laparoscopic tubal anastomosis (the one stitch technique): preliminary results. Human Reprod. 1995;10:2044-2046.
  6. Bissonnette FCA, Lapensee L, Bouzayen R. Outpatient laparoscopic tubal anastomosis and subsequent fertility. Fertil Steril. 1999;72:549-552.
  7. Caillet M, Vandromme J, Rozenberg S, Paesmans M, Germay O, Degueldre M. Robotically assisted laparoscopic microsurgical tubal anastomosis: a retrospective study. Fertil Steril. 2010;94:1844-1847.
References
  1. Chan LM, Westhoff CL. Tubal sterilization trends in the United States. Fertil Steril. 2010;94:1-6.
  2. Moss CC. Sterilization: a review and update. Obstet Gynecol Clin North Am. 2015-12-01;42:713-724.
  3. Gordts S, Campo R, Puttemans P, Gordts S. Clinical factors determining pregnancy outcome after microsurgical tubal anastomosis. Fertil Steril. 2009;92:1198-1202.
  4. Chi I-C, Jones DB. Incidence, risk factors, and prevention of poststerilization regret in women. Obstet Gynecol Surv. 1994;49:722-732.
  5. Dubuisson JB, Swolin K. Laparoscopic tubal anastomosis (the one stitch technique): preliminary results. Human Reprod. 1995;10:2044-2046.
  6. Bissonnette FCA, Lapensee L, Bouzayen R. Outpatient laparoscopic tubal anastomosis and subsequent fertility. Fertil Steril. 1999;72:549-552.
  7. Caillet M, Vandromme J, Rozenberg S, Paesmans M, Germay O, Degueldre M. Robotically assisted laparoscopic microsurgical tubal anastomosis: a retrospective study. Fertil Steril. 2010;94:1844-1847.
Issue
OBG Management - 30(11)
Issue
OBG Management - 30(11)
Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Display Headline
Robot-assisted laparoscopic tubal anastomosis following sterilization
Display Headline
Robot-assisted laparoscopic tubal anastomosis following sterilization
Sections
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Gate On Date
Fri, 10/26/2018 - 11:00
Un-Gate On Date
Fri, 10/26/2018 - 11:00
Use ProPublica
CFC Schedule Remove Status
Fri, 10/26/2018 - 11:00

Excision of a Bartholin gland cyst

Article Type
Changed
Wed, 09/05/2018 - 11:50
Display Headline
Excision of a Bartholin gland cyst

Bartholin gland cysts comprise up to 2% of all outpatient gynecology visits each year1 and are a common consult for trainees in obstetrics and gynecology. Although excision of a Bartholin gland cyst is a procedure performed infrequently, knowledge of its anatomy and physiology is important for ObGyn trainees and practicing gynecologists, especially when attempts at conservative management have been exhausted.

Before proceeding with surgical excision, it is important to understand the basics of Bartholin gland anatomy, pathologies, and treatment options. This video demonstrates the excisional technique for a 46-year-old woman with a recurrent, symptomatic Bartholin gland cyst who failed prior conservative management. I hope that you will find this video from my colleagues beneficial to your clinical practice.

 

 

Vidyard Video
References
  1. Marzano DA, Haefner HK. The bartholin gland cyst: past, present, and future. J Low Genit Tract Dis. 2004;8(3):195–204.
Article PDF
Author and Disclosure Information

Dr. Gabor is PGY-4 Resident, Columbia University Medical Center, New York, New York.

Dr. Mattingly is from Novant Health Pelvic Health & Surgery, Winston-Salem, North Carolina.

Dr. Kim is Assistant Clinical Professor of Obstetrics and Gynecology at Columbia University, College of Physicians and Surgeons in the Division of Gynecologic Surgical Services.

Dr. Advincula is Levine Family Professor of Women’s Health; Vice-Chair, Department of Obstetrics & Gynecology; Chief of Gynecology, Sloane Hospital for Women; and Medical Director, Mary & Michael Jaharis Simulation Center, Columbia University Medical Center,
New York-Presbyterian Hospital. He serves on the OBG MANAGEMENT Board of Editors.

Dr. Advincula reports serving as a consultant to ConMed, CooperSurgical, Intuitive Surgical, and Titan Medical and receiving royalties from CooperSurgical. The other authors report no financial relationships relevant to this article.

Issue
OBG Management - 30(9)
Publications
Topics
Page Number
52
Sections
Author and Disclosure Information

Dr. Gabor is PGY-4 Resident, Columbia University Medical Center, New York, New York.

Dr. Mattingly is from Novant Health Pelvic Health & Surgery, Winston-Salem, North Carolina.

Dr. Kim is Assistant Clinical Professor of Obstetrics and Gynecology at Columbia University, College of Physicians and Surgeons in the Division of Gynecologic Surgical Services.

Dr. Advincula is Levine Family Professor of Women’s Health; Vice-Chair, Department of Obstetrics & Gynecology; Chief of Gynecology, Sloane Hospital for Women; and Medical Director, Mary & Michael Jaharis Simulation Center, Columbia University Medical Center,
New York-Presbyterian Hospital. He serves on the OBG MANAGEMENT Board of Editors.

Dr. Advincula reports serving as a consultant to ConMed, CooperSurgical, Intuitive Surgical, and Titan Medical and receiving royalties from CooperSurgical. The other authors report no financial relationships relevant to this article.

Author and Disclosure Information

Dr. Gabor is PGY-4 Resident, Columbia University Medical Center, New York, New York.

Dr. Mattingly is from Novant Health Pelvic Health & Surgery, Winston-Salem, North Carolina.

Dr. Kim is Assistant Clinical Professor of Obstetrics and Gynecology at Columbia University, College of Physicians and Surgeons in the Division of Gynecologic Surgical Services.

Dr. Advincula is Levine Family Professor of Women’s Health; Vice-Chair, Department of Obstetrics & Gynecology; Chief of Gynecology, Sloane Hospital for Women; and Medical Director, Mary & Michael Jaharis Simulation Center, Columbia University Medical Center,
New York-Presbyterian Hospital. He serves on the OBG MANAGEMENT Board of Editors.

Dr. Advincula reports serving as a consultant to ConMed, CooperSurgical, Intuitive Surgical, and Titan Medical and receiving royalties from CooperSurgical. The other authors report no financial relationships relevant to this article.

Article PDF
Article PDF

Bartholin gland cysts comprise up to 2% of all outpatient gynecology visits each year1 and are a common consult for trainees in obstetrics and gynecology. Although excision of a Bartholin gland cyst is a procedure performed infrequently, knowledge of its anatomy and physiology is important for ObGyn trainees and practicing gynecologists, especially when attempts at conservative management have been exhausted.

Before proceeding with surgical excision, it is important to understand the basics of Bartholin gland anatomy, pathologies, and treatment options. This video demonstrates the excisional technique for a 46-year-old woman with a recurrent, symptomatic Bartholin gland cyst who failed prior conservative management. I hope that you will find this video from my colleagues beneficial to your clinical practice.

 

 

Vidyard Video

Bartholin gland cysts comprise up to 2% of all outpatient gynecology visits each year1 and are a common consult for trainees in obstetrics and gynecology. Although excision of a Bartholin gland cyst is a procedure performed infrequently, knowledge of its anatomy and physiology is important for ObGyn trainees and practicing gynecologists, especially when attempts at conservative management have been exhausted.

Before proceeding with surgical excision, it is important to understand the basics of Bartholin gland anatomy, pathologies, and treatment options. This video demonstrates the excisional technique for a 46-year-old woman with a recurrent, symptomatic Bartholin gland cyst who failed prior conservative management. I hope that you will find this video from my colleagues beneficial to your clinical practice.

 

 

Vidyard Video
References
  1. Marzano DA, Haefner HK. The bartholin gland cyst: past, present, and future. J Low Genit Tract Dis. 2004;8(3):195–204.
References
  1. Marzano DA, Haefner HK. The bartholin gland cyst: past, present, and future. J Low Genit Tract Dis. 2004;8(3):195–204.
Issue
OBG Management - 30(9)
Issue
OBG Management - 30(9)
Page Number
52
Page Number
52
Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Display Headline
Excision of a Bartholin gland cyst
Display Headline
Excision of a Bartholin gland cyst
Sections
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Gate On Date
Tue, 08/28/2018 - 14:30
Un-Gate On Date
Tue, 08/28/2018 - 14:30
Use ProPublica
CFC Schedule Remove Status
Tue, 08/28/2018 - 14:30
Article PDF Media