Relationship between race and abdominal anatomy

Effect on robotic port placement

Brent A. Parnell, Esin C. Midia, Julia R. Fielding, Barbara Robinson Henley, Catherine A. Matthews

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

1 Citation (Scopus)

Abstract

Objectives: We sought to characterize differences between African American women and white women in abdominal wall dimensions that could affect robotic port placement. By better understanding these differences, surgeons could assess and adjust port placement to accommodate varying abdominal wall anatomy. Methods: A radiologist blinded to race-reviewed abdominal/pelvic computed tomographic scans of women aged 30 to 70 prescreened for demographic inclusion criteria. These consecutive scans were screened for radiologic exclusion criteria until 40 consecutive scans from each race were identified and included. Results: Eighty of 663 patients, 40 of each race, met demographic inclusion criteria. The most common radiologic feature disqualifying the scans included absence of the xiphoid process on the scan and anterior abdominal wall deformity. Demographic variables including age, weight, height, and body mass index were similar between groups. Symphysis pubis to umbilicus measurement was shorter in the African American group (15.7 [2.1] vs 17.1 [2.0]; P < 0.001) and intraYanterior superior iliac spine distance was narrower (21.4 [1.2] vs 23.8 [2.0]; P = 0.003), creating an overall smaller lower abdomen in African American women. Total abdominal length was the same between groups (36.6 [2.6] vs 36.7 [2.8]; P = 0.851). Using linear regression, height, weight, and body mass index did not affect lower abdominal dimensions, whereas age (P < 0.001) had a significant inverse relationship with the symphysis pubis to umbilicus measurement. Conclusions: Lower abdominal dimensions between races vary, with the umbilicus serving as an inconsistent landmark. Variance exists that can be attributed to racial differences. Assessment of these dimensions at the time of robotic surgery could lead to improved port spacing and therefore fewer arm collisions, improving robotic efficiency.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)165-168
Number of pages4
JournalFemale Pelvic Medicine and Reconstructive Surgery
Volume19
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 2013

Fingerprint

Robotics
Umbilicus
Anatomy
Abdominal Wall
Pubic Bone
African Americans
Xiphoid Bone
Demography
Body Mass Index
Weights and Measures
Abdomen
Linear Models
Spine
Arm

Keywords

  • Abdominal dimensions
  • CT scan
  • Port placement
  • Race
  • Robotic surgery

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Obstetrics and Gynecology
  • Surgery
  • Urology

Cite this

Relationship between race and abdominal anatomy : Effect on robotic port placement. / Parnell, Brent A.; Midia, Esin C.; Fielding, Julia R.; Henley, Barbara Robinson; Matthews, Catherine A.

In: Female Pelvic Medicine and Reconstructive Surgery, Vol. 19, No. 3, 01.01.2013, p. 165-168.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Parnell, Brent A. ; Midia, Esin C. ; Fielding, Julia R. ; Henley, Barbara Robinson ; Matthews, Catherine A. / Relationship between race and abdominal anatomy : Effect on robotic port placement. In: Female Pelvic Medicine and Reconstructive Surgery. 2013 ; Vol. 19, No. 3. pp. 165-168.
@article{cf08d40ce8fc40688d3fb6e633ca9b36,
title = "Relationship between race and abdominal anatomy: Effect on robotic port placement",
abstract = "Objectives: We sought to characterize differences between African American women and white women in abdominal wall dimensions that could affect robotic port placement. By better understanding these differences, surgeons could assess and adjust port placement to accommodate varying abdominal wall anatomy. Methods: A radiologist blinded to race-reviewed abdominal/pelvic computed tomographic scans of women aged 30 to 70 prescreened for demographic inclusion criteria. These consecutive scans were screened for radiologic exclusion criteria until 40 consecutive scans from each race were identified and included. Results: Eighty of 663 patients, 40 of each race, met demographic inclusion criteria. The most common radiologic feature disqualifying the scans included absence of the xiphoid process on the scan and anterior abdominal wall deformity. Demographic variables including age, weight, height, and body mass index were similar between groups. Symphysis pubis to umbilicus measurement was shorter in the African American group (15.7 [2.1] vs 17.1 [2.0]; P < 0.001) and intraYanterior superior iliac spine distance was narrower (21.4 [1.2] vs 23.8 [2.0]; P = 0.003), creating an overall smaller lower abdomen in African American women. Total abdominal length was the same between groups (36.6 [2.6] vs 36.7 [2.8]; P = 0.851). Using linear regression, height, weight, and body mass index did not affect lower abdominal dimensions, whereas age (P < 0.001) had a significant inverse relationship with the symphysis pubis to umbilicus measurement. Conclusions: Lower abdominal dimensions between races vary, with the umbilicus serving as an inconsistent landmark. Variance exists that can be attributed to racial differences. Assessment of these dimensions at the time of robotic surgery could lead to improved port spacing and therefore fewer arm collisions, improving robotic efficiency.",
keywords = "Abdominal dimensions, CT scan, Port placement, Race, Robotic surgery",
author = "Parnell, {Brent A.} and Midia, {Esin C.} and Fielding, {Julia R.} and Henley, {Barbara Robinson} and Matthews, {Catherine A.}",
year = "2013",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1097/SPV.0b013e318288ad6d",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "19",
pages = "165--168",
journal = "Female Pelvic Medicine and Reconstructive Surgery",
issn = "2151-8378",
publisher = "Lippincott Williams and Wilkins",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Relationship between race and abdominal anatomy

T2 - Effect on robotic port placement

AU - Parnell, Brent A.

AU - Midia, Esin C.

AU - Fielding, Julia R.

AU - Henley, Barbara Robinson

AU - Matthews, Catherine A.

PY - 2013/1/1

Y1 - 2013/1/1

N2 - Objectives: We sought to characterize differences between African American women and white women in abdominal wall dimensions that could affect robotic port placement. By better understanding these differences, surgeons could assess and adjust port placement to accommodate varying abdominal wall anatomy. Methods: A radiologist blinded to race-reviewed abdominal/pelvic computed tomographic scans of women aged 30 to 70 prescreened for demographic inclusion criteria. These consecutive scans were screened for radiologic exclusion criteria until 40 consecutive scans from each race were identified and included. Results: Eighty of 663 patients, 40 of each race, met demographic inclusion criteria. The most common radiologic feature disqualifying the scans included absence of the xiphoid process on the scan and anterior abdominal wall deformity. Demographic variables including age, weight, height, and body mass index were similar between groups. Symphysis pubis to umbilicus measurement was shorter in the African American group (15.7 [2.1] vs 17.1 [2.0]; P < 0.001) and intraYanterior superior iliac spine distance was narrower (21.4 [1.2] vs 23.8 [2.0]; P = 0.003), creating an overall smaller lower abdomen in African American women. Total abdominal length was the same between groups (36.6 [2.6] vs 36.7 [2.8]; P = 0.851). Using linear regression, height, weight, and body mass index did not affect lower abdominal dimensions, whereas age (P < 0.001) had a significant inverse relationship with the symphysis pubis to umbilicus measurement. Conclusions: Lower abdominal dimensions between races vary, with the umbilicus serving as an inconsistent landmark. Variance exists that can be attributed to racial differences. Assessment of these dimensions at the time of robotic surgery could lead to improved port spacing and therefore fewer arm collisions, improving robotic efficiency.

AB - Objectives: We sought to characterize differences between African American women and white women in abdominal wall dimensions that could affect robotic port placement. By better understanding these differences, surgeons could assess and adjust port placement to accommodate varying abdominal wall anatomy. Methods: A radiologist blinded to race-reviewed abdominal/pelvic computed tomographic scans of women aged 30 to 70 prescreened for demographic inclusion criteria. These consecutive scans were screened for radiologic exclusion criteria until 40 consecutive scans from each race were identified and included. Results: Eighty of 663 patients, 40 of each race, met demographic inclusion criteria. The most common radiologic feature disqualifying the scans included absence of the xiphoid process on the scan and anterior abdominal wall deformity. Demographic variables including age, weight, height, and body mass index were similar between groups. Symphysis pubis to umbilicus measurement was shorter in the African American group (15.7 [2.1] vs 17.1 [2.0]; P < 0.001) and intraYanterior superior iliac spine distance was narrower (21.4 [1.2] vs 23.8 [2.0]; P = 0.003), creating an overall smaller lower abdomen in African American women. Total abdominal length was the same between groups (36.6 [2.6] vs 36.7 [2.8]; P = 0.851). Using linear regression, height, weight, and body mass index did not affect lower abdominal dimensions, whereas age (P < 0.001) had a significant inverse relationship with the symphysis pubis to umbilicus measurement. Conclusions: Lower abdominal dimensions between races vary, with the umbilicus serving as an inconsistent landmark. Variance exists that can be attributed to racial differences. Assessment of these dimensions at the time of robotic surgery could lead to improved port spacing and therefore fewer arm collisions, improving robotic efficiency.

KW - Abdominal dimensions

KW - CT scan

KW - Port placement

KW - Race

KW - Robotic surgery

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84879775853&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84879775853&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1097/SPV.0b013e318288ad6d

DO - 10.1097/SPV.0b013e318288ad6d

M3 - Article

VL - 19

SP - 165

EP - 168

JO - Female Pelvic Medicine and Reconstructive Surgery

JF - Female Pelvic Medicine and Reconstructive Surgery

SN - 2151-8378

IS - 3

ER -