Surgical Endoscopy

, Volume 15, Issue 3, pp 286–288

A comparison of laparoscopic supracervical hysterectomy vs laparoscopically assisted vaginal hysterectomy

Authors

  • M. P. Milad
    • Department of Obstetrics and GynecologyNorthwestern University Medical School and Northwestern Memorial Hospital
  • K. Morrison
    • Department of Obstetrics and GynecologyNorthwestern University Medical School and Northwestern Memorial Hospital
  • A. Sokol
    • Department of Obstetrics and GynecologyNorthwestern University Medical School and Northwestern Memorial Hospital
  • D. Miller
    • Department of Obstetrics and GynecologyNorthwestern University Medical School and Northwestern Memorial Hospital
  • L. Kirkpatrick
    • Department of Obstetrics and GynecologyNorthwestern University Medical School and Northwestern Memorial Hospital
Original article

DOI: 10.1007/s004640000328

Cite this article as:
Milad, M.P., Morrison, K., Sokol, A. et al. Surg Endosc (2001) 15: 286. doi:10.1007/s004640000328

Abstract

Background

We set out to compare the length of stay, costs, and morbidity associated with laparoscopic supracervical hysterectomy (LSH) with laparoscopically assisted vaginal hysterectomy (LAVH).

Methods

We performed a cohort analysis of consecutive patients at a university-based medical center from April 1997 through October 1999.

Results

A total of 145 patients were identified initially; however, 13 cases were excluded because of concomitant procedures (retropubic urethropexy, lymphadenectomy, paravaginal repair). Of the 132 patients included in the study, 27 underwent LSH and 105 underwent LAVH. The two groups were similar with respect to gravidity, parity, uterine weight, and preoperative diagnosis. Patients undergoing LSH had significantly shorter operating times (median, 181 vs 220 min, p = 0.007), briefer hospital stays (median, 1.0 vs 2.0 days, p = 0.0001), and less blood loss (median, 125 vs 400 ml, p = 0.0001). None of the patients submitted to LSH experienced morbidity, as compared with a 13% morbidity rate for LAVH (bladder injury, n = 3; blood loss >1000 ml, n = 7; vaginal cuff hematoma, n = 4; 0% vs 13%; p = 0.04).

Conclusions

Patients undergoing laparoscopic supracervical hysterectomy had shorter operating times, shorter hospital stays, and less morbidity than those who underwent laparoscopically assisted vaginal hysterectomy. The practice of routine cervicectomy at laparoscopic hysterectomy should be reconsidered.

Key words

Cost-benefit analysisHysterectomyLaparoscopyVaginal surgerySupracervical hysterectomyLaparoscopically assisted vaginal hysterectomy

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2001