Elsevier

Obstetrics & Gynecology

Volume 89, Issue 2, February 1997, Pages 304-311
Obstetrics & Gynecology

Review
Complications and recovery from laparoscopy-assisted vaginal hysterectomy compared with abdominal and vaginal hysterectomy

https://doi.org/10.1016/S0029-7844(96)00315-8Get rights and content

Objective

To complete a systematic review of the published literature comparing complications, postoperative recovery time, and costs following laparoscopy-assisted vaginal hysterectomy, total abdominal hysterectomy (TAH), and vaginal hysterectomy.

Data Sources

We searched MEDLINE and several bibliographies, identifying all reports using the term “laparoscopy-assisted hysterectomy” published from 1989 to September 1995.

Methods of Study Selection

We excluded case reports, letters, and reports of laparoscopy-assisted vaginal hysterectomy procedures used for radical cancer surgery, sex-change operations, total laparoscopic hysterectomy, or supracervical hysterectomy.

Tabulation, Integration, and Results

Cases identified included 3112 laparoscopy-assisted vaginal hysterectomies, 1618 TAHs, and 690 vaginal hysterectomies. Laparoscopyassisted vaginal hysterectomy cases compared with TAH cases demonstrated significantly greater incidence of bladder injury (1.8% for laparoscopy-assisted vaginal hysterectomy versus 0.4% for TAH; P = .01), significantly longer operating room time (115 minutes, standard deviation [SD] 37 minutes, for laparoscopy-assisted vaginal hysterectomy versus 87 minutes, SD 18 minutes, for TAH; P < .001), and significantly shorter hospitalization (49 hours, SD 16 hours, for laparoscopy-assisted vaginal hysterectomy versus 79 hours, SD 20 hours, for TAH; P < .001). Use of analgesia was consistently less for laparoscopy-assisted vaginal hysterectomy and return to full activity was always sooner when compared to TAH. Cost for the new procedure was higher in seven out of 11 studies, but when disposable instruments and hospital length of stay are considered, the remaining four studies reported a lower cost for laparoscopy-assisted vaginal hysterectomy.

Conclusion

Although laparoscopy-assisted vaginal hysterectomy involves a shorter hospital stay, speedier postoperative recovery, and less analgesia use, there is also a higher rate of bladder injury and lengthier surgery. These outcomes must be weighed when choosing an intervention.

References (39)

  • CarterJE et al.

    Laparoscopic assisted vaginal hysterectomy utilizing the contact tip and YAG laser: A review of 67 cases

    Ann Acad Med

    (1994)
  • Garcia-PadialJ et al.

    Laparoscopy assisted vaginal hysterectomy compared with abdominal hysterectomy

    J Natl Med Assoc

    (1995)
  • LeeCL et al.

    Laparoscopic hysterectomy with the endo GIA 30 stapler

    J Reprod Med

    (1993)
  • LiuCY

    Laparoscopic hysterectomy. Report of 215 cases

    Gynaecol Endosc

    (1992)
  • PhippsJH et al.

    Laparoscopic- and laparoscopically assisted vaginal hysterectomy: A series of 114 cases

    Gynaecol Endosc

    (1993)
  • RajuKS et al.

    A randomized prospective study of laparoscopic vaginal hysterectomy versus abdominal hysterectomy each with bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy

    Br J Obstet Gynaecol

    (1994)
  • GarryR et al.

    Initial experience with laparoscopic assisted Döderlein hysterectomy

    Br J Obstet Gynaecol

    (1995)
  • SayeWB et al.

    Laparoscopic Döderlein hysterectomy: A rational alternative to traditional abdominal hysterectomy

    Surg Laparosc Endosc

    (1993)
  • DaniellJF et al.

    Laparoscopically assisted vaginal hysterectomy: The initial Nashville, Tennessee experience

    J Reprod Med

    (1993)
  • Cited by (146)

    • Adenomyosis: A Clinical Review of a Challenging Gynecologic Condition

      2016, Journal of Minimally Invasive Gynecology
    • Comparison of laparoscopically assisted vaginal hysterectomy and abdominal hysterectomy: A randomized controlled trial

      2012, Journal of Minimally Invasive Gynecology
      Citation Excerpt :

      The very small subgroup sample sizes in subgroup analysis are a study limitation. The additional advantages of LAVH—other than less blood loss—were (a) shorter postoperative hospital stays and (b) less need for postoperative analgesics; both of which have been reported elsewhere [2–17]. LAVH is more beneficial than the traditional TAH for decreasing (a) intraoperative blood loss, (b) the need for postoperative transfusions, (c) the length of postoperative hospital stays, and (d) postoperative analgesic requests, with no difference in operating time or intraoperative/postoperative complications.

    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text