{"paper_id":"fcf45d45-6873-439e-81ba-2ffa25b39293","body_text":"Abstract\nPurpose\nTo assess the quality of care following the establishment of a multidisciplinary care pathway for patient operated on for deep pelvic endometriosis with digestive impairment.\nMethods\nWe conducted a retrospective monocentric study of patients suffering from deep infiltrating endometriosis, treated in Gynaecological Department at Toulouse University Hospital from January 2018 to December 2020. We compared our results to those of our previous study, Gornes et al. which showed a postoperative complication occurred in 37.8% of the cases and a postoperative severe complication according to the Clavien–Dindo classification (grades 3b) rate of 18.3%.\nResults\n98 patients were included. Our study shows a clear decrease in postoperative complications with an overall complication rate of 19.4% and severe complications (grades 3b) of 4.1%. The rate of complication appeared to be significantly less frequent in the case of shaving in relation to other digestive procedures (p = 0.008) and in the case of a lesion of < 20 mm by MRI (p = 0.01). The use of multidisciplinary surgical care was more frequent in the case of multiple locations (66.7% vs. 41.8%, p = 0.07) and was more frequent in the case of transmural damage with echo endoscopy (and to a lesser degree in the case of damage of the muscularis or mucous membrane) (p = 0.05).\nConclusions\nMultidisciplinary care of endometriosis with digestive damage appears to be indispensable. The intraoperative intervention of a skilled digestive surgeon of bowel endometriosis helps create the best balance between effectiveness–complications–functional prognosis, with a reduction of severe postoperative complications.\nSimilar content being viewed by others\nData availability\nNot applicable.\nReferences\nWorking Group of Esge E et al (2020) Recommendations for the surgical treatment of endometriosis. Part 2: deep endometriosis. Hum Reprod Open 2020(1):hoaa002\nGornes H et al (2020) Identification of a group with high risk of postoperative complications after deep bowel endometriosis surgery: a retrospective study on 164 patients. Arch Gynecol Obstet 302(2):383–391\nParra RS, Feitosa MR, Feres O (2021) Postoperative complications after deep bowel endometriosis surgery: Is the surgical technique the only one to blame? Arch Gynecol Obstet 304(5):1381–1382\nClavien PA et al (2009) The Clavien–Dindo classification of surgical complications: five-year experience. Ann Surg 250(2):187–196\nDindo D, Demartines N, Clavien PA (2004) Classification of surgical complications: a new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey. Ann Surg 240(2):205–213\nNicolaus K et al (2020) Extensive endometriosis surgery: rASRM and Enzian score independently relate to post-operative complication grade. Arch Gynecol Obstet 301(3):699–706\nHudelist G et al (2018) Pain and fertility outcomes of nerve-sparing, full-thickness disk or segmental bowel resection for deep infiltrating endometriosis—a prospective cohort study. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 97(12):1438–1446\nMalzoni M et al (2016) Feasibility and safety of laparoscopic-assisted bowel segmental resection for deep infiltrating endometriosis: a retrospective cohort study with description of technique. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 23(4):512–525\nBendifallah S et al (2021) Surgical outcomes after colorectal surgery for endometriosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 28(3):453–466\nRoman H et al (2020) Early postoperative complications in a multidisciplinary surgical center exclusively dedicated to endometriosis: a 491-patients series. Gynecol Obstet Fertil Senol 48(6):484–490\nRoman H, Group F (2017) A national snapshot of the surgical management of deep infiltrating endometriosis of the rectum and colon in France in 2015: a multicenter series of 1135 cases. J Gynecol Obstet Hum Reprod 46(2):159–165\nRoman H et al (2020) Risk of bowel fistula following surgical management of deep endometriosis of the rectosigmoid: a series of 1102 cases. Hum Reprod 35(7):1601–1611\nBraund S et al (2021) Risk of postoperative stenosis after segmental resection versus disk excision for deep endometriosis infiltrating the rectosigmoid: a retrospective study. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 28(1):50–56\nWolthuis AM et al (2014) Bowel endometriosis: colorectal surgeon’s perspective in a multidisciplinary surgical team. World J Gastroenterol 20(42):15616–15623\nMalzoni M et al (2020) Preoperative ultrasound indications determine excision technique for bowel surgery for deep infiltrating endometriosis: a single high-volume center. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 27(5):1141–1147\nWolthuis AM, Tomassetti C (2014) Multidisciplinary laparoscopic treatment for bowel endometriosis. Best Pract Res Clin Gastroenterol 28(1):53–67\nAbrao MS et al (2015) Deep endometriosis infiltrating the recto-sigmoid: critical factors to consider before management. Hum Reprod Update 21(3):329–339\nRoman H et al (2015) Full-thickness disc excision in deep endometriotic nodules of the rectum: a prospective cohort. Dis Colon Rectum 58(10):957–966\nSimoens S et al (2011) Endometriosis cost assessment (the endocost study): a cost-of-illness study protocol. Gynecol Obstet Invest 71(3):170–176\nUgwumadu L et al (2017) The role of the multidisciplinary team in the management of deep infiltrating endometriosis. Gynecol Surg 14(1):15\nFunding\nThe authors declare that no funds, grants, or other support were received during the preparation of this manuscript.\nAuthor information\nAuthors and Affiliations\nContributions\nAll authors contributed to the study conception and design. Material preparation, data collection and analysis were performed by EC, AW and VS. The first draft of the manuscript was written by EC, AW and VS, and all authors commented on previous versions of the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.\nCorresponding author\nEthics declarations\nConflict of interest\nThe authors have no relevant financial or non-financial interests to disclose.\nEthical approval\nThis is an observational study. The RnIPH2022-107 Research Ethics Committee has confirmed that no ethical approval is required.\nInformed consent\nNot applicable.\nIRB ethical approval\nNot applicable.\nAdditional information\nPublisher's Note\nSpringer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.\nSupplementary Information\nBelow is the link to the electronic supplementary material.\nRights and permissions\nSpringer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.\nAbout this article\nCite this article\nWeyl, A., Sevy, V., Lepage, B. et al. Study of postoperative complications after the implementation of a multidisciplinary care pathway for patients with digestive endometriosis. Arch Gynecol Obstet 307, 1459–1468 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-022-06899-1\nReceived:\nAccepted:\nPublished:\nVersion of record:\nIssue date:\nDOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-022-06899-1","source_license":"CC0","license_restricted":false}