The median age of all patients was 59 years. Case patients undergoing concurrent procedures were more likely to be older (median of 64 vs. 57 years) and postmenopausal.
“Other statistically significant differences were that women undergoing combined surgery had higher vaginal parity, and were more likely to have undergone preoperative chemotherapy. They were also more likely to have a prior diagnosis of cardiovascular or pulmonary disease,” Dr. Davidson said.
“Women undergoing treatment for suspected gynecologic malignancy have the same or higher prevalence of pelvic floor disorders, compared with the general population, and they may choose to have combined surgery if both subspecialists are available,” she continued. “However, there are limited data regarding the incidence of adverse events in these concurrent procedures, or how often the planned urogynecology portion of the procedure is modified intraoperatively.”
Though limited by factors inherent in retrospective chart review, such as information bias at the time of data collection (which was mitigated by cross-checking data and having only two data collectors), the findings of the current study suggest that “concurrent urogynecologic and gynecologic oncology surgery should be offered to appropriate patients, as adding urogynecology surgery does not increase the risk of serious adverse events,” she concluded, adding that the study “highlights the importance of preoperative counseling, including discussion of the increased risk of minor postoperative adverse events, such as postoperative voiding symptoms and urinary tract infection, as well as discussion of the 10% risk of a change in intraoperative plan in the urogynecologic procedure.”