Histological Characterization of Vaginal Cuff Tissue Using Different Energy Sources During Robotic Hysterectomy
Vaginal cuff dehiscence, a rare complication of gynecologic surgeries, can be devastating, particularly when associated with bowel evisceration. A review of records from 1970 - 2001 at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, MN revealed a low incidence (0.032%) of vaginal cuff dehiscence after pelvic operation via both abdominal and vaginal approaches3. At a single, large, tertiary care facility, total laparoscopic hysterectomy (TLH) was associated with an increased incidence of vaginal cuff dehiscence compared to other approaches (4.93% vs. 0.29% TVH, and 0.12% TAH)1. A review of our robotic experience revealed a vaginal cuff dehiscence incidence of 4.1%, which is comparable to the previously reported incidence for TLH2. An increasing number of laparoscopic hysterectomies are being performed in the United States with the rate of laparoscopic procedures increasing from 0.3% in 1990 to 11.8% in 20034. With 11.8% of 600,000 annual hysterectomies being performed via the laparoscopic route in the United States, there would be an estimated 3,400 cases of vaginal cuff dehiscence per year.
The cause of the higher rate of vaginal cuff dehiscence in both laparoscopic and robotic hysterectomies is currently unknown. One of the major differences between the laparoscopic and robotic approach as compared to the vaginal/abdominal route is the method by which the cervix is amputated from the vagina. With the vaginal and abdominal approaches, a colpotomy is made sharply with a knife or scissors. In contrast, the colpotomy is performed with electrocoagulation with the laparoscopic and robotic routes. One theory to explain the increased dehiscence incidence is the lateral thermal effects of electrocoagulation on the vaginal cuff which may adversely affect tissue healing.
This study aims primarily to shed light on the etiology of vaginal cuff healing after a robotic total hysterectomy. This will be done by comparing the extent of thermal injury at the cellular level using monopolar vs CO2 laser at the time of the colpotomy.
Study Overview
Status
Study Type
Enrollment (Actual)
Contacts and Locations
Study Locations
-
-
Arizona
-
Phoenix, Arizona, United States, 50854
- Mayo Clinic in Arizona
-
-
Participation Criteria
Eligibility Criteria
Ages Eligible for Study
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
Genders Eligible for Study
Sampling Method
Study Population
Description
Inclusion Criteria:
- Female
- Patient over age of 18 years undergoing a robotic total hysterectomy
- Patients in Mayo Clinic (Arizona)
Exclusion Criteria:
- Patients with gynecologic malignancy involving the vagina
Study Plan
How is the study designed?
Design Details
Cohorts and Interventions
Group / Cohort |
|---|
|
CO2 Laser
|
|
Monopolar energy
|
What is the study measuring?
Primary Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Time Frame |
|---|---|
|
Extent of thermal injust grossly from free tissue edge (mm)
Time Frame: at 12 and 6 o'clock
|
at 12 and 6 o'clock
|
Collaborators and Investigators
Sponsor
Investigators
- Principal Investigator: Rosanne M Kho, MD, Mayo Clinic
Study record dates
Study Major Dates
Study Start
Primary Completion (Actual)
Study Completion (Actual)
Study Registration Dates
First Submitted
First Submitted That Met QC Criteria
First Posted (Estimate)
Study Record Updates
Last Update Posted (Estimate)
Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria
Last Verified
More Information
Terms related to this study
Other Study ID Numbers
- 10-001538
This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.