Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Outcomes and Cost of Hysterectomy: Comparing Abdominal, Vaginal, Laparoscopic, and Robotic Approaches

  • Minimally Invasive Gynecologic Surgery (A Fader, Section Editor)
  • Published:
Current Obstetrics and Gynecology Reports Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Options for approach to hysterectomy include abdominal, vaginal, laparoscopic or robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery. There are well-documented benefits to minimally invasive modes of surgery compared to traditional abdominal procedures. Despite this fact, the majority of hysterectomies in the United States are still performed via laparotomy. With regard to differentiation between the various minimally invasive approaches, it has been consistently demonstrated that robotic hysterectomy procedures are associated with longer operative times and higher cost. However, the available literature is limited by the small number of randomized or prospective studies comparing surgical approach to hysterectomy.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance •• Of outstanding importance

  1. National Center for Health Statistics. Health, United States, 2005 with Chartbook on Trends in the Health of Americans, Table 100. NCHS, Hyattsville, MD (2005)

  2. Merrill RM, Layman AB, Oderda G, Asche C. Risk estimates of hysterectomy and selected conditions commonly treated with hysterectomy. Ann Epidemiol. 2008;18(3):253–60.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Suton C. Past, present, and future of hysterectomy. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2010;17(4):421–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Baskett TF. Hysterectomy: evolution and trends. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 2005;19(3):295–305.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Semm K. Hysterectomy via laparotomy or pelviscopy. A new CASH method without colpotomy. Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd. 1991;51(12):996–1003.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Reich H, de Cripo J, McGlynn F. Laparoscopic hysterectomy. J Gynecol Surg. 1989;5:213–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Diaz-Arrastia C, Jurnalov C, Gomez G, Townsend Jr C. Laparoscopic hysterectomy using a computer enhanced surgical robot. Surg Endosc. 2002;16(9):1271–3.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Wright JD, Herzog TJ, Tsui J, Ananth CV, Lewin SN, Lu YS, et al. Nationwide trends in the performance of inpatient hysterectomy in the United States. Obstet Gynecol. 2013;122(2 Pt 1):233–41. This article provides an interesting look at hysterectomy trends between 1998 and 2010. Using the Nationwide Inpatient Sample, the authors extrapolated annual hysterectomy volume in the United States and reported a decline in hysterectomy volume over time to a nadir of 433,621 cases in 2010.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Cohen SL, Vitonis AF, Einarsson JI. Updated hysterectomy surveillance. JSLS. 2014; in press.

  10. Wright JD, Ananth CV, Lewin SN, Burke WM, Lu YS, Neugut AI, et al. Robotically assisted vs laparoscopic hysterectomy among women with benign gynecologic disease. JAMA. 2013;309(7):689–98.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Lee J, Jennings K, Borahay MA, Rodriguez AM, Kilic GS, Snyder RR, Patel PR. Trends in the national distribution of laparoscopic hysterectomies from 2003-2010. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2014.

  12. Washburn EE, Cohen SL, Manoucheri E, Zurawin R, Einarsson JI. Trends in Reported Resident Surgical Experience in Hysterectomy. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2014; in press.

  13. Nieboer TE, Johnson N, Lethaby A, et al. Surgical approach to hysterectomy for benign gynaecological disease. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2009; (3): CD003677.

  14. Mäkinen J, Brummer T, Jalkanen J, Heikkinen AM, Fraser J, Tomás E, et al. Ten years of progress–improved hysterectomy outcomes in Finland 1996–2006: a longitudinal observation study. BMJ Open. 2013;3(10):e003169.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Mamik MM, Antosh D, White DE, Myers EM, Abernethy M, Rahimi S, Bhatia N, Qualls CR, Dunivan G, Rogers RG. Risk factors for lower urinary tract injury at the time of hysterectomy for benign reasons. Int Urogynecol J. 2014.

  16. ACOG Committee Opinion. No. 444: choosing the route of hysterectomy for benign disease. Obstet Gynecol. 2009;114(5):1156–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. AAGL Advancing Minimally Invasive Gynecology Worldwide. AAGL position statement: route of hysterectomy to treat benign uterine disease. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2011;18(1):1–3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Silasi DA, Gallo T, Silasi M, Menderes G, Azodi M. Robotic versus abdominal hysterectomy for very large uteri. JSLS. 2013;17(3):400–6.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Sesti F, Cosi V, Calonzi F, Ruggeri V, Pietropolli A, Di Francesco L, Piccione E. Randomized comparison of total laparoscopic, laparoscopically assisted vaginal and vaginal hysterectomies for myomatous uteri. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2014.

  20. Bogani G, Cromi A, Uccella S, Serati M, Casarin J, Pinelli C, Lazzarini C, Ghezzi F. Laparoscopic versus vaginal hysterectomy for benign indications in women aged 65 years or older: propensity-matched analysis. Menopause. 2014.

  21. Carbonnel M, Abbou H, N'guyen HT, Roy S, Hamdi G, Jnifen A, et al. Robotically assisted hysterectomy versus vaginal hysterectomy for benign disease: a prospective study. Minim Invasive Surg. 2013;2013:429105.

    CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Paraiso MF, Ridgeway B, Park AJ, Jelovsek JE, Barber MD, Falcone T, et al. A randomized trial comparing conventional and robotically assisted total laparoscopic hysterectomy. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2013;208(5):368.e1–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Sarlos D, Kots L, Stevanovic N, von Felten S, Schär G. Robotic compared with conventional laparoscopic hysterectomy: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol. 2012;120(3):604–11. This study is a randomized trial of 100 patients who were assigned to either robotic or conventional laparoscopic hysterectomy. The authors report comparable perioperative outcomes but longer operative time with robotic cases.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Patzkowsky KE, As-Sanie S, Smorgick N, Song AH, Advincula AP. Perioperative outcomes of robotic versus laparoscopic hysterectomy for benign disease. JSLS. 2013;17(1):100–6.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Martino MA, Berger EA, McFetridge JT, Shubella J, Gosciniak G, Wejkszner T, et al. A comparison of quality outcome measures in patients having a hysterectomy for benign disease: robotic vs. non-robotic approaches. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2014;21(3):389–93.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Rosero EB, Kho KA, Joshi GP, Giesecke M, Schaffer JI. Comparison of robotic and laparoscopic hysterectomy for benign gynecologic disease. Obstet Gynecol. 2013;122(4):778–86. The authors utilized data from the 2009 and 2010 Nationwide Inpatient Sample to demonstrate differences between robotic and laparoscopic hysterectomy. They found that hospital costs were on average $2,489 greater with robotic procedures.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Woelk JL, Borah BJ, Trabuco EC, Heien HC, Gebhart JB. Cost differences among robotic, vaginal, and abdominal hysterectomy. Obstet Gynecol. 2014;123(2 Pt 1):255–62. This study provides an in-depth look at all-cause costs associated with varying modes of hysterectomy, including the cost of readmissions and complications. They demonstrated the lower cost with vaginal hysterectomy, and similar costs with robotic or abdominal hysterectomy.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Dayaratna S, Goldberg J, Harrington C, Leiby BE, McNeil JM. Hospital costs of total vaginal hysterectomy compared with other minimally invasive hysterectomy. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2014;210(2):120.e1–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Cho HY, Park ST, Kim HB, Kang SW, Park SH. Surgical outcome and cost comparison between total vaginal hysterectomy and laparoscopic hysterectomy for uteri weighing >500 g. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2014;21(1):115–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Tapper AM, Hannola M, Zeitlin R, Isojärvi J, Sintonen H, Ikonen TS. A systematic review and cost analysis of robot-assisted hysterectomy in malignant and benign conditions. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2014;177:1–10.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Teljeur C, O'Neill M, Moran P, Harrington P, Flattery M, Murphy L, Ryan M. Economic evaluation of robot-assisted hysterectomy: a cost-minimisation analysis. BJOG. 2014.

  32. Wright JD, Ananth CV, Tergas AI, Herzog TJ, Burke WM, Lewin SN, et al. An economic analysis of robotically assisted hysterectomy. Obstet Gynecol. 2014;123(5):1038–48.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Compliance with Ethics Guidelines

Conflict of Interest

Dr. Sarah L. Cohen and Dr. Jon I. Einarsson each declare no potential conflicts of interest.

Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent

This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Division of Minimally Invasive Gynecologic Surgery, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, 75 Francis Street, Boston, MA, 02115, USA

    Sarah L. Cohen & Jon I. Einarsson

Authors
  1. Sarah L. Cohen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jon I. Einarsson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sarah L. Cohen.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Cohen, S.L., Einarsson, J.I. The Outcomes and Cost of Hysterectomy: Comparing Abdominal, Vaginal, Laparoscopic, and Robotic Approaches. Curr Obstet Gynecol Rep 3, 277–280 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13669-014-0098-3

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13669-014-0098-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation