Search

Background: Robotic surgery has gained popularity for the reconstruction of pelvic floor defects. Nonetheless, there is no evidence that robot-assisted reconstructive surgery is either appropriate or superior to standard laparoscopy for the performance of pelvic floor reconstructive procedures or that it is sustainable. The aim of this project was to address the proper role of robotic pelvic floor reconstructive procedures using expert opinion. Methods: We set up an international, multidisciplinary group of 26 experts to participate in a Delphi process on robotics as applied to pelvic floor reconstructive surgery. The group comprised urogynecologists, urologists, and colorectal surgeons with long-term experience in the performance of pelvic floor reconstructive procedures and with the use of the robot, who were identified primarily based on peer-reviewed publications. Two rounds of the Delphi process were conducted. The first included 63 statements pertaining to surgeons’ characteristics, general questions, indications, surgical technique, and future-oriented questions. A second round including 20 statements was used to reassess those statements where borderline agreement was obtained during the first round. The final step consisted of a face-to-face meeting with all participants to present and discuss the results of the analysis. Results: The 26 experts agreed that robotics is a suitable indication for pelvic floor reconstructive surgery because of the significant technical advantages that it confers relative to standard laparoscopy. Experts considered these advantages particularly important for the execution of complex reconstructive procedures, although the benefits can be found also during less challenging cases. The experts considered the robot safe and effective for pelvic floor reconstruction and generally thought that the additional costs are offset by the increased surgical efficacy. Conclusion: Robotics is a suitable choice for pelvic reconstruction, but t

Objectives: Because the term ''interstitial cystitis'' (IC) has different meanings in different centers and different parts of the world, the European Society for the Study of Interstitial Cystitis (ESSIC) has worked to create a consensus on definitions, diagnosis, and classification in an attempt to overcome the lack of international agreement on various aspects of IC. Methods: ESSIC has discussed definitions, diagnostic criteria, and disease classification in four meetings and extended e-mail correspondence. Results: It was agreed to name the disease bladder pain syndrome (BPS) BPS would be diagnosed on the basis of chronic pelvic pain, pressure, or discomfort perceived to be related to the urinary bladder accompanied by at least one other urinary symptom such as persistent urge to void or urinary frequency. Confusable diseases as the cause of the symptoms must be excluded. Classification of BPS types might be performed according to findings at cystoscopy with hydrodistention and morphologic findings in bladder biopsies. The presence of other organ symptoms as well as cognitive, behavioral, emotional, and sexual symptoms, should be addressed. Conclusions: The name IC has become misleading and is replaced by BPS. This name is in line with recent nomenclature recommendations by the European Association of Urology and is based on the axial structure of the international Association for the Study of Pain classification. To facilitate the change of the name, ESSIC agreed to include IC in the overall term (BPS/IC) during this transition period. (C) 2007 European Society for the Study of Bladder Pain Syndrome/Interstitial Cystitis. Published by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of European Association of Urology Udgivelsesdato: 2008/1

Objectives: Because the term ''interstitial cystitis'' (IC) has different meanings in different centers and different parts of the world, the European Society for the Study of Interstitial Cystitis (ESSIC) has worked to create a consensus on definitions, diagnosis, and classification in an attempt to overcome the lack of international agreement on various aspects of IC. Methods: ESSIC has discussed definitions, diagnostic criteria, and disease classification in four meetings and extended e-mail correspondence. Results: It was agreed to name the disease bladder pain syndrome (BPS) BPS would be diagnosed on the basis of chronic pelvic pain, pressure, or discomfort perceived to be related to the urinary bladder accompanied by at least one other urinary symptom such as persistent urge to void or urinary frequency. Confusable diseases as the cause of the symptoms must be excluded. Classification of BPS types might be performed according to findings at cystoscopy with hydrodistention and morphologic findings in bladder biopsies. The presence of other organ symptoms as well as cognitive, behavioral, emotional, and sexual symptoms, should be addressed. Conclusions: The name IC has become misleading and is replaced by BPS. This name is in line with recent nomenclature recommendations by the European Association of Urology and is based on the axial structure of the international Association for the Study of Pain classification. To facilitate the change of the name, ESSIC agreed to include IC in the overall term (BPS/IC) during this transition period. (C) 2007 European Society for the Study of Bladder Pain Syndrome/Interstitial Cystitis. Published by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of European Association of Urology Udgivelsesdato: 2008/1