Clinical Utility of Routine Preoperative Laboratory Assessment in a Urogynecologic Population

Julia Geynisman-Tan*, Katarzyna Bochenska, Akira Gillingham, Sarah Collins, Christina Lewicky-Gaupp, Margaret Mueller, Kimberly Kenton

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

Objective The objective of this study was to determine the incidence of newly diagnosed, clinically meaningful laboratory abnormalities on routine preoperative laboratory testing in women undergoing urogynecologic surgery. Methods All urogynecologic cases performed at a single institution over a 3-year period were reviewed. Women undergoing major surgery routinely had a basic metabolic panel, complete blood count (CBC), and type and screen, whereas women undergoing minor surgery had testing at the surgeon's discretion. Demographics, surgical details, preoperative laboratory values, and instances of postoperative transfusion were abstracted. If testing revealed a clinically meaningful abnormality, physician notes were reviewed to determine whether the abnormality was previously known or led to surgical postponement. Results A total of 836 cases were identified: 411 major (49%) and 425 minor (51%). Patients had a mean ± SD age of 57 ± 13 years and body mass index of 27 ± 6 kg/m2. Medical comorbidities were hypertension, 38%; diabetes, 24%; chronic kidney disease, 3%; and congestive heart failure, 4%; 89% had an American Society of Anesthesiologists class of less than or equal to 2. A total of 453 (54%) had preoperative CBC, and 367 (44%) had preoperative basic metabolic panel. Six (1.3%) new abnormalities (hemoglobin between 8.0 and 10.0) were identified on CBC. Thirty-one women had elevated creatinine level (>1.0), and 28 (90%) of these had a history of hypertension. No surgeries were postponed or changed owing to anemia, thrombocytopenia, or renal dysfunction. No clinically significant electrolyte abnormalities were identified. Type and screen were collected on 394 patients; none were transfused intraoperatively. Conclusions Routine preoperative laboratory testing does not identify clinically meaningful abnormalities or alter surgical management in women undergoing urogynecologic surgery.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)550-553
Number of pages4
JournalFemale Pelvic Medicine and Reconstructive Surgery
Volume26
Issue number9
DOIs
StatePublished - Sep 1 2020

Keywords

  • comorbidities
  • preoperative evaluation
  • surgical management

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Surgery
  • Obstetrics and Gynecology
  • Urology

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Clinical Utility of Routine Preoperative Laboratory Assessment in a Urogynecologic Population'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this