Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Hysterectomy and women satisfaction: total versus subtotal technique

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Introduction

The impact of different surgical procedures on women’s satisfaction after hysterectomy is a topical issue. The aim of this study was to investigate the impact of sub-total and total hysterectomy on women’s satisfaction, evaluated with questionnaire assessment of sexual activity, body image, and health status.

Materials and methods

A prospective, randomized, non-blind study was conducted. In the study period of 3 years, 105 women were enrolled and completed the questionnaires [EuroQol (EQ-5D), body image scale (BIS), sexual activity questionnaire] 2 weeks before and 1 year after surgery.

Results

Both total and sub-total hysterectomy resulted with improvements in the women’s sexual satisfaction (1 year after surgery), but no statistically significant differences were reached between the two groups. A highly significant difference (P < 0.001) in the perception of the body image between total and sub-total hysterectomy, at 1 year after surgery, was underlined. The health-related quality of life resulted significantly better in the “sub-total hysterectomy” group 1 year after surgery (P < 0.05).

Conclusion

Considering these results, why should a total hysterectomy be performed, if the women’s satisfaction seems to be higher using the sub-total technique? In our opinion, the woman undergoing hysterectomy for benign conditions must be counseled regarding the differences between the two techniques and, when possible, a choice must be offered to the woman.

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

Access this article

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Thakar R, Ayers S, Clarkson P, Manyonda I (2002) Outcomes after total versus subtotal abdominal hysterectomy. N Engl J Med 347:1318–1325

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Carlson KJ, Nichols DH, Schiff I (1993) Indications for hysterectomy. N Engl J Med 328:856–860

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Sutton C (1997) Hysterectomy: a historical perspective. Baillieres Clin Obstet Gynaecol 11:1–22

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Storm HH, Clemmensen IH, Manders T, Brinton LA (1992) Supravaginal uterine amputation in Denmark 1978–1988 and risk of cancer. Gynecol Oncol 45(2):198–201

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Haas S, Acker D, Donahue C, Katz ME (1993) Variation in hysterectomy rates across small geographic areas of Massachusetts. Am J Obstet Gynecol 169:150–154

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Carlson KJ, Miller BA, Fowler FJ Jr (1994) The mine women’s health study. I. outcomes of hysterectomy. Obstet Gynecol 83:556–565

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Kjerulff KH, Langenberg PW, Rhodes JC, Harvey LA, Guzinski GM, Stolley PD (2000) Effectiveness of hysterectomy. Obstet Gynecol 95:319–326

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Virtanen HS, Makinen JI, Tenho T, Kiiholma P, Pitkanen Y, Hirvonen T (1993) Effects of abdominal hysterectomy on urinary and sexual symptoms. Br J Urol 72:868–872

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Gimbel H (2007) Total or subtotal hysterectomy for benign uterine diseases? A meta-analysis. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 86(2):133–144

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Lethaby A, Ivanova V, Johnson NP (2006) Total versus subtotal hysterectomy for benign gynaecological conditions (review). Cochrane Coll, pub2:1–33, CD004993

    Google Scholar 

  11. EuroQol Group (1990) EuroQol—a new facility for the measurement of health-related quality of life. Health Policy 16:199–208

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Hopwood P, Fletcher I, Lee A, Al Ghazal S (2001) A body image scale for use with cancer patients. Eur J Cancer 37:189–197

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Thirlaway K, Fallowfield L, Cuzick J (1996) The sexual activity questionnaire: a measure of women’s sexual functioning. Qual Life Res 5:81–90

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Stead M, Fountain J, Napp V, Brown J (2004) Psychometric properties of the body image scale in women with benign gynaecological conditions. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 114(2):215–220

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Smith PH, Ballantyne B (1968) The neuroanatomical basis of denervation of the urinary bladder following major pelvic surgery. Br J Surg 55:929–933

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Parys BT, Haylen B, Hutton JL, Parsons KF (1989) The effect of simple hysterectomy on vescicourethral function. Br J Urol 64:594–599

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Weber Am, Lee J-C (1996) Use of alternative techniques of hysterectomy in Ohio, 1988–1994. N Engl J Med 335:483–489 (Erratum, N Engl J Med 1996;335:1406)

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Schaffer JI, Word A (2002) Hysterectomy—still a useful operation. N Engl J Med 347(17):1360–1362

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Maresh MJA, Metcalfe MA, McPherson K et al (2002) The VALUE national hysterectomy study: description of the patients and their surgery. BJOG 109:302–312

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Scott JR, Sharp HT, Dodson MK, Norton PA, Warner HR (1997) Subtotal hysterectomy in modern gynecology: a decision analysis. Am J Obstet Gynecol 176:1186–1192

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Sloan D (1978) The emotional and psychosexual aspects of hysterectomy. Am J Obstet Gynecol 131:598–605

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Gimbel H, Zobbe V, Andersen BA, Filtenborg T, Gluud C, Tabor A (2003) Randomised controlled trial of total compared with subtotal hysterectomy with one-year follow up results. BJOG 110:1088–1098

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Roovers JPWR, van der Bom JG, van der Vaart CH, Heintz PM (2003) Hysterectomy and sexual wellbeing: prospective observational study of vaginal hysterectomy, subtotal abdominal hysterectomy, and total abdominal hysterectomy. BMJ 327:774–779

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Gutl P, Greimel ER, Roth R, Winter R (2002) Women’s sexual behavior, body image and satisfaction with surgical outcomes after hysterectomy: a comparison of vaginal and abdominal surgery. J Psychosom Obstet Gynaecol 23:51–59

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Jacobson GS, Shaber RE, Armstrong MA, Hung Y (2006) Hysterectomy rates for benign indications. Obstet Gynecol 107:1278–1283

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Zekam N, Oyelese Y, Goodwin K, Sinai I, Queenan JT (2003) Total versus subtotal hysterectomy: a survey of gynecologists. Obstet Gynecol 102:301–305

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Davide Lijoi.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Gorlero, F., Lijoi, D., Biamonti, M. et al. Hysterectomy and women satisfaction: total versus subtotal technique. Arch Gynecol Obstet 278, 405–410 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-008-0615-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-008-0615-6

Keywords

Navigation