Impact of vertical versus horizontal vaginal cuff closure on vaginal length following hysterectomy: a meta-analysis of randomized trials
- 26 Downloads
Introduction and hypothesis
Posthysterectomy vaginal length has been previously associated with postoperative sexual dysfunction, but evidence for this in the literature is controversial. The purpose of this meta-analysis was to investigate whether vertical or horizontal closure of the vaginal cuff has a direct effect on posthysterectomy vaginal length and on postoperative sexual dysfunction.
The study was conducted using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. We searched Medline, Scopus, Clinicaltrials.gov, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Google Scholar databases.
Overall, five randomized trials were included in this meta-analysis with 223 patients. The results suggest that horizontal closure of the vaginal cuff results in a shorter vaginal length compared with vertical closure [mean difference (MD) −0.77 cm, 95% confidence interval (CI) −1.12 to −0.43]. Mean vaginal length significantly decreased when the horizontal method was used (MD −0.61 cm, 95% CI −0.97 to −0.24). The subgroup analysis revealed that vertical closure was associated with longer vaginal length only in cases treated with vaginal hysterectomy. Trial sequential analysis revealed that our meta-analysis had adequate power to support these results. Postoperative sexual function was evaluated in only one study; no differences were observed.
Findings of our meta-analysis suggest that horizontal closure of the vaginal vault results in shorter vaginal length in vaginal hysterectomies; thus, we suggest that this technique be avoided. Data concerning quality of life of patients and specifically sexual dysfunction remain extremely limited and should be studied in future trials.
KeywordsHorizontal Vertical Vaginal cuff Hysterectomy Dyspareunia Meta-analysis
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflicts of interest
Research involving human participants and/or animals
This systematic review and meta-analysis are based on previously published aggregated data.
Institutional review board approval
An IRB approval was not needed because this study used previously published aggregated data.
Formal consent is not required for this type of study.
- 3.Pakbaz M, Mogren I, Lofgren M. Outcomes of vaginal hysterectomy for uterovaginal prolapse: a population-based, retrospective, cross-sectional study of patient perceptions of results including sexual activity, urinary symptoms, and provided care. BMC Womens Health. 2009;9:9. https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6874-9-9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 7.Ye S, Yang J, Cao D, Zhu L, Lang J, Shen K. Quality of life and sexual function of cervical cancer patients following radical hysterectomy and vaginal extension. Zhonghua Fu Chan Ke Za Zhi. 2014;49(8):609–15.Google Scholar
- 8.Bastu E, Yasa C, Dural O, Ozgor BY, Yilmaz G, Gungor Ugurlucan F, et al. Comparison of 2 methods of vaginal cuff closure at laparoscopic hysterectomy and their effect on female sexual function and vaginal length: a randomized clinical study. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2016;23(6):986–93. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmig.2016.07.007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 11.Liberati A, Altman DG, Tetzlaff J, Mulrow C, Gotzsche PC, Ioannidis JP, et al. The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: explanation and elaboration. J Clin Epidemiol. 2009;62(10):e1–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2009.06.006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 14.Mantel N, Haenszel W. Statistical aspects of the analysis of data from retrospective studies of disease. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1959;22(4):719–48.Google Scholar
- 15.Higgins J, Green S. 9.5.2 Identifying and measuring heterogeneity. Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions. 2011.Google Scholar
- 18.Cavkaytar S, Kokanali MK, Topcu HO, Aksakal OS, Doganay M. Effects of horizontal vs vertical vaginal cuff closure techniques on vagina length after vaginal hysterectomy: a prospective randomized study. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2014;21(5):884–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmig.2014.03.025.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 20.Ucar MG, Ilhan TT, Sanlikan F, Celik C. Sexual functioning before and after vaginal hysterectomy to treat pelvic organ prolapse and the effects of vaginal cuff closure techniques: a prospective randomised study. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2016;206:1–5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejogrb.2016.08.041.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 28.Polat M, Kahramanoglu I, Senol T, Senturk B, Ozkaya E, Karateke A. Comparison of the effect of laparoscopic and abdominal hysterectomy on lower urinary tract function, vaginal length, and dyspareunia: a randomized clinical trial. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 2016;26(2):116–21. https://doi.org/10.1089/lap.2015.0437.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 29.ACOG Committee Opinion No. 444: choosing the route of hysterectomy for benign disease. Obstet Gynecol. 2009;114(5):1156-1158. https://doi.org/10.1097/AOG.0b013e3181c33c72.