Facts, Views & Vision
in ObGyn

Journal of the European Society for Gynaecological Endoscopy

esge_logo

Utility of routine preoperative laboratory testing for patients undergoing minor gynaecologic surgical procedures: interim analysis of their impact on intraoperative and postoperative complications

U. Catena1, A. Biasioli2, C. Paglietti3, V. Tarantino4, G. Pellecchia3, G. Esposito4, F. Previtera3, S. Zermano2, M. Arcieri2,5, A. Graziano3, G. Dinoi1, F. Ciano6, L. Driul2,3, G. Draisci6, F. Fanfani1, G. Scambia1, G. Vizzielli2,3, S. Restaino2

1 UOC Ginecologia Oncologica, Dipartimento per la salute della Donna e del Bambino e della Sanità Pubblica, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli, IRCCS, Largo Agostino Gemelli, 00168, Rome, Italy
2 Department of Maternal and Child Health, “Santa Maria della Misericordia” University Hospital, Azienda Sanitaria Universitaria Friuli Centrale (ASUFC), Piazzale della Misericordia, 33100, Udine, Italy
3 Department of Medicine (DMED), University of Udine, 33100 Udine, Italy
4 Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Largo Francesco Vito, 00168, Rome, Italy
5 Department of Biomedical, Dental, Morphological and Functional Imaging Science, University of Messina, 98122 Messina, Italy
6 Department of Anaesthesiology and Resuscitation Medicine, Sacro Cuore Catholic University, Largo Francesco Vito, 00168, Rome, Italy

Keywords:

Gynaecological surgery, hysteroscopy, laboratory, preoperative, blood test, surgical complications


Published online: Sep 30 2024

https://doi.org/10.52054/FVVO.16.3.027

Abstract

Background: Despite discouragement from many scientific societies, routine preoperative testing remains a common practice. Minor gynaecological surgery, being widely performed in everyday practice, represents an opportunity for implementing cost-reduction policies by avoiding unnecessary diagnostic assessments.

Objectives: To assess whether performing routine preoperative blood tests affects postoperative complications and cost-effectiveness in patients undergoing minor gynaecological surgery.

Materials and Methods: An interim subgroup analysis of a retrospective study conducted by Fondazione Policlinico Gemelli (Rome) and Azienda Sanitaria Universitaria Friuli Centrale (Udine) was performed. Patients who underwent surgery under general anaesthesia were included. The studied population was divided based on the preoperative work up. Clinical data, surgical features and complications were collected.

Main outcome measures: Intraoperative and postoperative complications, healthcare expenditure in two groups.

Results: Subgroup analysis included 1191 patients in Centre A (Rome) who underwent routine complete preoperative tests and 500 patients in Centre B (Udine), who underwent exams only if indicated. Population characteristics were similar in two groups. Postoperative complications were observed in 1.2% and 1.4% of cases in Group A and Group B, respectively (p=0.70). Severe complications occurred in 0.3% of cases in Group A and 0.4% in Group B. Group B showed a cost saving of approximately 70 Euros per procedure (p < 0.001).

Conclusions: Preliminary data indicate that routine perioperative assessment did not reduce complication rates, hospital readmissions or surgical reinterventions. Given the high number of procedures, performing specific preoperative tests only when indicated may result in significant cost reduction.

What is new? This study selectively highlights the potential benefits to overall public health expenditure that could be achieved through stricter adherence to guidelines on preoperative assessment in minor gynaecological surgery.