A randomized control trial comparing vaginal and laparoscopically-assisted vaginal hysterectomy in the absence of uterine prolapse in a South African tertiary institution.

OBJECTIVES: The primary objectives of this study were to estimate blood loss, operation time and cost differences in patients undergoing vaginal hysterectomy (VH) versus laparoscopically-assisted vaginal hysterectomy (LAVH). The secondary objectives were to determine differences in hospital stay, need for postoperative analgesia, intra- and immediate post-operative complications, and the rate of conversion to laparotomy. VH was hypothesized to be the preferred route for hysterectomy for benign uterine conditions. STUDY DESIGN: A randomized control study was undertaken at the Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology of the Charlotte Maxeke Johannesburg Academic Hospital and included the women admitted between January 2017 and December 2019 for hysterectomy due to benign conditions, meeting the inclusion criteria (vaginally accessible uterus, estimated uterine size ≤ 12 weeks of gestation or ≤ 280 g on ultrasound examination and pathology confined to the uterus). Surgical procedures were performed by the residents in training under the supervision of specialists with large experience. The patient demographic characteristics, uterine weight, operative time, estimated blood loss(expressed as the difference between preoperative and postoperative day one serum haemoglobin),direct surgery-associated costs, intra- and immediate post-operative complications and the length of hospital stay were recorded and comparatively analysed among patients randomly placed in VH and LAVH group. RESULTS: A total of 227 women were included (151 patients underwent VH and 76 LAVH, upon 2:1 randomization, performed on this way to reflect the previous pattern of operating of the unit). The patients were matched with respect to age, parity and body mass index. No significant differences between two groups were found in mean uterine weight and also in mean serum haemoglobin shift, intra- and immediate post-operative complications, and convalescence period duration. There were statistically significant differences in operating time and in cost between the two procedures. On average, LAVH took longer than VH to be performed (62.8 ± 9.3 vs 29.9 ± 6.6 min, p < 0.0001) and it was more costly, mainly due to the longer operating time and required disposables. An amount of 15698.20 South African Rand (ZAR) or 1145.85 United States Dollar (USD) more were needed to perform LAVH in comparison to VH. All VHs and LAVHs were successfully accomplished without major complications or conversation to laparotomy. CONCLUSION: Our data indicate that VH is a feasible and safe alternative for a large group of women with benign pathology and non-prolapsed uteri, being a faster and less costly procedure than LAVH.

Formal institutional guidelines promotes the vaginal approach to hysterectomy in patients with benign disease and non-prolapsed uterus.

OBJECTIVES: This study was undertaken at the Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology of the Charlotte Maxeke Johannesburg Academic Hospital to determine if the use of formal guidelines and a standardised surgical technique would increase the rate of vaginal hysterectomy (VH) and result in an overall decline in open abdominal hysterectomy (AH). STUDY DESIGN: All women admitted between July 2001 and December 2014 for hysterectomy due to benign conditions, meeting the guidelines criteria (vaginally accessible uterus, uterus ≤ 12 weeks size or ≤ 280 g on ultrasound examination and pathology confined to the uterus) were included. The surgical route was determined using the Unit surgical decision tree algorithm. In cases where the pathology was not confined to the uterus or success in VH was uncertain, laparoscopic assisted vaginal hysterectomy (LAVH) was performed. The VH procedures were performed by the residents in training, under the supervision of specialists with large experience in vaginal surgery. In addition to the patient characteristics and surgical approach to hysterectomy, length of hospital stay, intra-operative and immediate post-operative complications were also recorded and analysed. RESULTS: A year before the initiation of the study, the percentage of all VHs undertaken in the Department was 9.8 % (mainly performed for utero-vaginal prolapse). During the study period, 1143 vaginal procedures (1017 VHs and 126 LAVHs) were performed. The most common indications were cervical dysplasia, uterine fibroids, dysmenorrhoea or abnormal uterine bleeding, adenomyosis, endometrial hyperplasia and chronic pelvic pain. Introducing a formal clinical decision tree algorithm and a standardised surgical technique resulted in an increase in the rate of VH to 48.4 % and overall decline in open AH from 91.2%-51.6%. Thus, the VH/AH ratio increased from 1/9 at the beginning of the study (July 2001) to 1/1 by its end (December 2014). In all cases, VH was performed without the need to convert the vaginal to the abdominal route. CONCLUSION: The use of institutional guidelines for determining the hysterectomy route and a standardised VH technique resulted in an increased number of performed VHs. This provided an essential opportunity for residents to acquire, improve and maintain the skills required to safely perform VH.

Evidence-based practical guidelines of the International Society for Gynecologic Endoscopy (ISGE) for vaginal hysterectomy.

OBJECTIVE: The study was established by the International Society for Gynecologic Endoscopy (ISGE) to provide evidence-based recommendations in the steps that should be undertaken in successfully performing a vaginal hysterectomy for a non-prolapsed uterus. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The ISGE Task Force for vaginal hysterectomy for the non-prolapsed uterus defined key clinical questions regarding the surgical technique, which led the Medline/PubMed and the Cochrane Database literature search. Identified pertinent articles, published in English from 1997 to 2019, were analysed. The available information was graded by the level of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) Working Group approach. The recommendations were developed through multiple cycles of literature analysis and expert discussion. RESULTS: Six recommendations were established: 1. A circular incision at the level of cervico-vaginal junction is recommended (grade IC). 2. The posterior peritoneum should be opened first (grade IC). 3. Clamping and cutting the uterosacral and cardinal ligaments before or after getting access into anterior peritoneum is recommended (grade IC). 4. Routine closure of the peritoneum during vaginal hysterectomy is not recommended (grade IB). 5. Vertical or horizontal closure of the vaginal vault following vaginal hysterectomy is recommended (grade IC). 6. To insert a vaginal plug following vaginal hysterectomy is not recommended (grade IB). CONCLUSION: Vaginal hysterectomy for a non-prolapsed uterus should be the preferential route for removing the uterus when hysterectomy is indicated. The ISGE provides evidence-based practical guidelines on how vaginal hysterectomy for non-prolapsed uterus should be undertaken. All efforts should be directed in teaching the surgical technique of vaginal hysterectomy during residency.

Evidence-based guidelines for vaginal hysterectomy of the International Society for Gynecologic Endoscopy (ISGE).

OBJECTIVE: This project was established by the International Society for Gynecologic Endoscopy (ISGE) to provide evidence-based recommendations on the selection of women in whom vaginal hysterectomy can be safely performed. STUDY DESIGN: The ISGE Task Force for vaginal hysterectomy for non-prolapsed uterus defined key clinical questions that led the literature search and formulation of recommendations. The search included Medline/PubMed and Cochrane Database. English language articles were reviewed from January 2003 to January 2018, in conjunction with reviews published by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) and the American Association of Gynecologic Laparoscopists (AAGL). The bibliographies of selected works were also checked to acquire additional data where relevant. The available information was graded by the level of evidence using the approach developed by the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) Working Group. For each clinical question, the ISGE recommendations were defined in accordance with the evidence quality. RESULTS: Six recommendations on patient selection for vaginal hysterectomy, including two grade 1B and four grade 2B recommendations were established. CONCLUSION: Vaginal hysterectomy for non-prolapsed uterus is the treatment of choice for many gynaecological patients in whom hysterectomy is indicated. It may be safely executed, and thus, should be offered to a large group of appropriately selected women, who today are operated in the main by the abdominal or laparoscopic approach. All efforts should be directed towards teaching the technique of vaginal hysterectomy during residency.