Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Vaginal repair of vesicovaginal fistula: comparison of national practice patterns by surgeon specialty

  • Original Article
  • Published:
International Urogynecology Journal Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Introduction and hypothesis

There are limited data comparing patient and operative characteristics for vaginal repair of vesicovaginal fistula (VVF) by surgeon specialty. Our objective was to compare national practice patterns by surgeon specialty for vaginal repair of VVF.

Methods

Using the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database, we conducted a retrospective cohort analysis of women who underwent vaginal repair of VVF from 2010 to 2019. Demographic and perioperative characteristics were compared by surgeon specialty.

Results

A total of 252 women were analyzed. Urologists performed 57% of cases (n=144), gynecologists performed 38% (n=96), and general surgeons performed 5% (n=12). There were differences among surgeon specialties in patient characteristics including age (p=0.002), creatinine (p=0.002), hypertension (p=0.02), morbidity probability (p<0.001), hospital stay (p<0.001), inpatient status (p=0.03). Urologists were more likely than gynecologists to use grafts/flaps (p=0.002). There were trending differences among surgeon specialties in patient race (p=0.07) and ethnicity (p=0.06). Urologists and gynecologists were more likely to operate on younger, healthier patients with differences in racial populations. When directly comparing urologists with gynecologists, there were differences in race (p=0.05) and a trending difference in ethnicity (p=0.06), General surgeons were more likely to operate on older white women with worse health status, more concomitant procedures, and longer hospital stay.

Conclusions

Urologists, gynecologists, and general surgeons perform vaginal repair of VVF. Among these specialties, there were differences in patient and perioperative characteristics. This information may help referring providers and patients to understand which types of surgical providers most commonly manage VVF.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Hadley HR. Vesicovaginal fistula. Curr Urol Rep. 2002;3(5):401–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Medlen H, Barbier H. Vesicovaginal fistula. In StatPearls. Treasure Island, FL: StatPearls; 2020.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Wall LL. Obstetric vesicovaginal fistula as an international public-health problem. Lancet. 2006;368(9542):1201–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Walters MD, Karram MM, editors. Urogynecology and reconstructive pelvic surgery. 4th ed. Philadelphia: Elsevier Saunders; 2015.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Lee RA, Symmonds RE, Williams TJ. Current status of genitourinary fistula. Obstet Gynecol. 1988;72(3 Pt 1):313–9.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Bodner-Adler B, Hanzal E, Pablik E, Koelbl H, Bodner K. Management of vesicovaginal fistulas (VVFs) in women following benign gynaecologic surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS One. 2017;12(2):e0171554.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Breen M, Ingber M. Controversies in the management of vesicovaginal fistula. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 2019;54:61–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Theofanides MC, Sui W, Sebesta EM, Onyeji I, Matulay JT, Chung DE. Vesicovaginal fistulas in the developed world: an analysis of disease characteristics, treatments, and complications of surgical repair using the ACS-NSQIP database. Neurourol Urodyn. 2017;36(6):1622–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Dorairajan LN, Khattar N, Kumar S, Pal BP. Latzko repair for vesicovaginal fistula revisited in the era of minimal-access surgery. Int Urol Nephrol. 2008;40(2):317–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Cromwell D, Hilton P. Retrospective cohort study on patterns of care and outcomes of surgical treatment for lower urinary-genital tract fistula among English National Health Service hospitals between 2000 and 2009. BJU Int. 2013;111(4 Pt B):E257–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. ACS National Surgical Quality Improvement Program® (ACS NSQIP®). 2021. Available from: https://www.facs.org/quality-programs/acs-nsqip. Accessed 2021.

  12. Henderson WG, Daley J. Design and statistical methodology of the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program: why is it what it is? Am J Surg. 2009;198(5 Suppl):S19–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Cohen ME, Liu Y, Ko CY, Hall BL. Improved surgical outcomes for ACS NSQIP hospitals over time: evaluation of hospital cohorts with up to 8 years of participation. Ann Surg. 2016;263(2):267–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Ko CY, Hall BL, Hart AJ, Cohen ME, Hoyt DB. The American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program: achieving better and safer surgery. Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf. 2015;41(5):199–204.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Von Elm E, Altman DG, Egger M, et al. The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) Statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies. Int J Surg. 2014;12(12):1495–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. ACS NSQIP Operations Manual. 2020, American College of Surgeons.

  17. ACS NSQIP Participant Use Data File. 2021. Available from: https://www.facs.org/quality-programs/acs-nsqip/participant-use. Accessed 2021.

  18. James MB, Theofanides MC, Sui W, Onyeji I, Badalato GM, Chung DE. Sling procedures for the treatment of stress urinary incontinence: comparison of national practice patterns between urologists and gynecologists. J Urol. 2017;198(6):1386–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Racial and ethnic minorities made up about 22 percent of the rural population in 2018, compared to 43 percent in urban areas. 2020, Economic Research Service U.S. Department of Agriculture.

  20. Demographic and economic trends in urban, suburban and rural communities. 2018. Available from: https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/2018/05/22/demographic-and-economic-trends-in-urban-suburban-and-rural-communities/. Accessed 2021.

  21. Rayburn WF, Klagholz JC, Murray-Krezan C, Dowell LE, Strunk AL. Distribution of American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists fellows and junior fellows in practice in the United States. Obstet Gynecol. 2012;119(5):1017–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Odisho AY, Fradet V, Cooperberg MR, Ahmad AE, Carroll PR. Geographic distribution of urologists throughout the United States using a county level approach. J Urol. 2009;181(2):760–5 discussion 765–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Stinson WW Jr, Sticca RP, Timmerman GL, Bjordahl PM. Current trends in surgical procedures performed in rural general surgery practice. Am Surg. 2021;87(7):1133–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Cunningham C. Pursuing a career in humanitarian and rural surgery: when is the best time to start? 2013 [cited 2022. Available from: https://bulletin.facs.org/2013/02/pursuing-a-career/. Accessed 2021.

  25. Browning A. Lack of value of the Martius fibrofatty graft in obstetric fistula repair. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2006;93(1):33–7.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Rangnekar NP, Ali NI, Kaul SA, Pathak HR. Role of the martius procedure in the management of urinary-vaginal fistulas. J Am Coll Surg. 2000;191(3):259–63.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. ACGME. Case log information: urology. 2020. Available from: http://acgme.org/Portals/0/PFAssets/ProgramResources/480-Urology-Case-Log-Info.pdf. Accessed 2021.

  28. ACGME. Case log information: obstetrics and gynecology. 2020. Available from: https://www.acgme.org/Portals/0/PFAssets/ProgramResources/OBGYNCaseLogInfo.pdf?ver=2020-11-20-163905-143. Accessed 2021.

  29. ACGME. Defined category minimum numbers for general surgery residents and credit role. 2019; 21 March 2021]. Available from: https://www.acgme.org/Portals/0/DefinedCategoryMinimumNumbersforGeneralSurgeryResidentsandCreditRole.pdf. Accessed 2021.

  30. ACGME. Case log information: female pelvic medicine and reconstructive surgery. 2020. Available from: https://www.acgme.org/Portals/0/PFAssets/ProgramResources/FPMRSCaseLogInst.pdf?ver=2020-11-23-134505-263. Accessed 2021.

  31. ACGME. The Female Pelvic Medicine and Reconstructive Surgery Milestone Project. 2015; 24February 2021]. Available from: https://www.acgme.org/Portals/0/PDFs/Milestones/FemalePelvicMedicineandReconstructiveSurgeryMilestones.pdf. Accessed 2021.

  32. Find a Provider. 2017. Available from: https://www.voicesforpfd.org/find-a-provider/. Accessed 2021.

Download references

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank the hospitals affiliated with the University of North Carolina. We would like to thank Christopher Wiesen of The Odum Institute at UNC Chapel Hill for consultation on statistics and Jamie Conklin of the UNC Health Sciences Library for consultation on the literature review.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Contributions

Geller and Margulies significantly contributed to the project development, data collection, data analysis, manuscript writing and editing.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Samantha L. Margulies.

Ethics declarations

Statements and declarations

No relevant financial disclosures or conflicts of interest. Dr. Geller is an unpaid speaker and has received a grant from Boston Scientific as well as provides freelance expert testimony.

Ethics approval

This study was deemed exempt by the Office of Human Research Ethics at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Margulies, S.L., Geller, E.J. Vaginal repair of vesicovaginal fistula: comparison of national practice patterns by surgeon specialty. Int Urogynecol J 33, 1675–1683 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-022-05199-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-022-05199-1

Keywords

Navigation