Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics

, Volume 289, Issue 4, pp 803–807 | Cite as

The impact of the body mass index (BMI) on laparoscopic hysterectomy for benign disease

  • David Bardens
  • Erich Solomayer
  • Sascha Baum
  • Julia Radosa
  • Stefan Gräber
  • Achim Rody
  • Ingolf Juhasz-BössEmail author
General Gynecology



To investigate the influence of the body mass index (BMI) on laparoscopic hysterectomy, including all intra- and postoperative findings and complications.


We reviewed and analyzed the medical records of 200 patients who underwent laparoscopic hysterectomy for benign disease at the Saarland University Hospital. The patient collective was subdivided into four weight groups on the basis of the current WHO BMI classification. Data analysis was carried out by a professional statistician.


Over half of the women screened were overweight or obese. The operating times increased together with the BMI (p = 0.017). Blood losses differed significantly between the weight groups (p = 0.027), but ranged to a maximum of only 300 ml. One laparoconversion had to be performed. No other intraoperative complications occurred. During our follow-up time of 13.2 ± 5.4 months, the overall rate of postoperative complications differed significantly between the weight groups (p = 0.008). The group of overweight women had the highest rate of complications and the group of obese women had the lowest. However, the rate of women who required readmission and reoperation was not elevated in the overweight group.


Laparoscopic hysterectomy is a safe and feasible method even in obese and morbidly obese patients. Overweight and obesity increase the time needed to perform laparoscopic hysterectomy but do not seem to relevantly influence the rate of major intra- or postoperative complications.


Body mass index (BMI) Laparoscopy Hysterectomy Obesity Overweight 


Conflict of interest

The authors indicate no potential conflicts of interest. This study was not funded.


  1. 1.
    (2000) Obesity: preventing and managing the global epidemic. Report of a WHO consultation. World Health Organ Tech Rep Ser 894:i–xii (pp 1–253)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Wang Y, Beydoun MA (2007) The obesity epidemic in the United States—gender, age, socioeconomic, racial/ethnic, and geographic characteristics: a systematic review and meta-regression analysis. Epidemiol Rev 29:6–28. doi: 10.1093/epirev/mxm007 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    DeMaria EJ, Carmody BJ (2005) Perioperative management of special populations: obesity. Surg Clin North Am 85:1283–1289. doi: 10.1016/j.suc.2005.09.002 (p xii)PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Anaya DA, Dellinger EP (2006) The obese surgical patient: a susceptible host for infection. Surg Infect 7:473–480. doi: 10.1089/sur.2006.7.473 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Heinberg EM, Crawford BL 3rd, Weitzen SH, Bonilla DJ (2004) Total laparoscopic hysterectomy in obese versus nonobese patients. Obstet Gynecol 103:674–680. doi: 10.1097/01.AOG.0000119224.68677.72 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bijen CBM, de Bock GH, Vermeulen KM et al (2011) Laparoscopic hysterectomy is preferred over laparotomy in early endometrial cancer patients, however not cost effective in the very obese 1990. Eur J Cancer Oxf Engl 47:2158–2165. doi: 10.1016/j.ejca.2011.04.035 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    O’Hanlan KA, Lopez L, Dibble SL et al (2003) Total laparoscopic hysterectomy: body mass index and outcomes. Obstet Gynecol 102:1384–1392PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Mueller A, Thiel F, Lermann J et al (2010) Feasibility and safety of total laparoscopic hysterectomy (TLH) using the Hohl instrument in nonobese and obese women. J Obstet Gynaecol Res 36:159–164. doi: 10.1111/j.1447-0756.2009.01112.x PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Mueller A, Renner SP, Haeberle L et al (2009) Comparison of total laparoscopic hysterectomy (TLH) and laparoscopy-assisted supracervical hysterectomy (LASH) in women with uterine leiomyoma. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 144:76–79. doi: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2009.02.004 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Bardens D, Solomayer E, Baum S et al (2012) Comparison of total and supracervical laparoscopic hysterectomy for benign disease in a collective of 200 patients. J Gynecol Surg 28:333–337. doi: 10.1089/gyn.2012.0016 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Lash MM, Armstrong A (2009) Impact of obesity on women’s health. Fertil Steril 91:1712–1716. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2008.02.141 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Terry KL, De Vivo I, Hankinson SE et al (2007) Anthropometric characteristics and risk of uterine leiomyoma. Epidemiol Camb Mass 18:758–763. doi: 10.1097/EDE.0b013e3181567eed CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Chopin N, Malaret JM, Lafay-Pillet M-C et al (2009) Total laparoscopic hysterectomy for benign uterine pathologies: obesity does not increase the risk of complications. Hum Reprod Oxf Engl 24:3057–3062. doi: 10.1093/humrep/dep348 Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Osler M, Daugbjerg S, Frederiksen BL, Ottesen B (2011) Body mass and risk of complications after hysterectomy on benign indications. Hum Reprod Oxf Engl 26:1512–1518. doi: 10.1093/humrep/der060 Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Siedhoff MT, Carey ET, Findley AD et al (2012) Effect of extreme obesity on outcomes in laparoscopic hysterectomy. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 19:701–707. doi: 10.1016/j.jmig.2012.07.005 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • David Bardens
    • 1
  • Erich Solomayer
    • 1
  • Sascha Baum
    • 1
  • Julia Radosa
    • 1
  • Stefan Gräber
    • 2
  • Achim Rody
    • 1
    • 3
  • Ingolf Juhasz-Böss
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.Department of Obstetrics and GynecologySaarland University HospitalHomburgGermany
  2. 2.Institute of Medical Biometrics, Epidemiology, and Medical Informatics (IMBEI)University of the SaarlandHomburgGermany
  3. 3.Department of Obstetrics and GynecologySchleswig-Holstein University HospitalLübeckGermany

Personalised recommendations