Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Gynecological Surgery 4/2006

01-12-2006 | Review Article

A comparative survey of various uterine manipulators used in operative laparoscopy

Authors: L. Mettler, Y. A. Nikam

Published in: Gynecological Surgery | Issue 4/2006

Login to get access

Abstract

This survey compares seven commonly used uterine manipulators in various laparoscopic procedures. These devices were compared with each other in respect of the various movement ranges they offered with anteversion, retroversion, lateral movement, elevation, and any special movement. It also compares the ability of the uterine manipulators with regard to the presentation of the vaginal fornices, and the ease of assembly, handling, and maintenance of the pneumoperitoneum. The information about the instruments was collected form the instrument manufacturer’s websites and other related articles. No single uterine manipulator seems to have all the attributes of an ideal manipulator and the choice of uterine manipulator need to be individualized according to the surgical procedure in which it is used. The Clermont-Ferrand model provides a 140° range of uterine movements and it allows the uterus to flex on itself, but it requires cervical dilatation prior to insertion and is difficult to assemble. The RUMI with the KOH colpotomizer has a 140° range of uterine manipulation and delineates the vaginal fornices nicely, but has restricted elevation of the uterus and is difficult to assemble. The Hourcabie is easy to use and allows easy stapling of the uterine pedicles, but is poor in maintaining the pneumoperitoneum. The Endopath and Vcare are single-use manipulators and are useful only in laparoscopic assisted vagina hysterectomy (LAVH) or laparoscopic assisted supra-cervical hysterectomy (LASH) procedures, as they cannot delineate the vaginal fornices. The HOHL and TLH-Dr Mangeshikar manipulators provide a 130° range and have good uterine elevation; hence, they are useful for total laparoscopic hysterectomy (TLH) and endometriosis procedures. Ultimately, the TLH-Dr Mangeshikar and the Clermont-Ferrand model come close to being versatile.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Rossetti A (2003) The TrocarOnline Video Journal. Complesso Integrato Columbus. Unit of Endocrinological Gynecology, Rome, Italy Studio Alfa-v.le Regina Mergherita 157–00198 Rome, Italy Rossetti A (2003) The TrocarOnline Video Journal. Complesso Integrato Columbus. Unit of Endocrinological Gynecology, Rome, Italy Studio Alfa-v.le Regina Mergherita 157–00198 Rome, Italy
3.
go back to reference Koh CH (1998) A new technique and system for simplifying total laparoscopic hysterectomy. J Am Assoc Gynecol Laparosc 5:187–192PubMedCrossRef Koh CH (1998) A new technique and system for simplifying total laparoscopic hysterectomy. J Am Assoc Gynecol Laparosc 5:187–192PubMedCrossRef
4.
go back to reference Wu HH, Yeh GP, Hsieh TC (2005) Iatrogenic uterine rupture caused by overinflation of RUMI uterine manipulator balloon. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 12(2):174–176PubMedCrossRef Wu HH, Yeh GP, Hsieh TC (2005) Iatrogenic uterine rupture caused by overinflation of RUMI uterine manipulator balloon. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 12(2):174–176PubMedCrossRef
5.
go back to reference Hourcabie JA, Bruhat MA (1993) One hundred and three cases of laparoscopic hysterectomy using Endo-GIA staples and a device for presenting the vaginal fornices. Gynecol Endosc 2:65–72 Hourcabie JA, Bruhat MA (1993) One hundred and three cases of laparoscopic hysterectomy using Endo-GIA staples and a device for presenting the vaginal fornices. Gynecol Endosc 2:65–72
Metadata
Title
A comparative survey of various uterine manipulators used in operative laparoscopy
Authors
L. Mettler
Y. A. Nikam
Publication date
01-12-2006
Publisher
Springer-Verlag
Published in
Gynecological Surgery / Issue 4/2006
Print ISSN: 1613-2076
Electronic ISSN: 1613-2084
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10397-006-0215-z

Other articles of this Issue 4/2006

Gynecological Surgery 4/2006 Go to the issue