Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
International Urogynecology Journal
Published in: International Urogynecology Journal 3/2017

01-03-2017 | Editorial

Why do we argue about route of hysterectomy? A call for dialogue

Author: Andrew J. Walter

Published in: International Urogynecology Journal | Issue 3/2017

Login to get access

Excerpt

As part of the Presidential Address given at the 42nd Annual Scientific Meeting of the Society of Gyneocologic Surgeons, I made a call for a national dialogue to increase the rate of vaginal hysterectomy to at least 40%. I admit this number is arbitrary and is based upon an internal review of hysterectomies performed at The Permanente Group North Valley. Data revealed that about one half of patients were vaginally parous, had no suspicion for adnexal pathology, and had a uterus <12 weeks in size—technically the most straightforward candidates for vaginal hysterectomy. Doing 80% of these patients via the vaginal route would translate to a vaginal hysterectomy rate of 40%. In addition, cases series and randomized controlled trials (from USA and international authors) confirm that this higher rate is feasible [1‐4]. …
Literature
1.
Kovac SR, Barhan S, Lister M, Tucker L, Bishop M, Das A. Guidelines for the selection of the route of hysterectomy: application in a resident clinic population. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2002;187:1521–7.CrossRefPubMed
2.
Benassi L, Rossi T, Kaihura CT, Ricci L, Bedocchi L, Galanti B, et al. Abdominal or vaginal hysterectomy for enlarged uteri: a randomized clinical trial. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2002;187:1561–5.CrossRefPubMed
3.
Nielsen SL, Daugbjerg SB, Gimbel H, Settnes A. Use of vaginal hysterectomy in Denmark: rates, indications and patient characteristics. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2011;90:978–84.CrossRefPubMed
4.
Lönnerfors C, Reynisson P, Persson J. A randomized trial comparing vaginal and laparoscopic hysterectomy vs robot-assisted hysterectomy. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2015;22:78–86.CrossRefPubMed
5.
American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology. ACOG Committee Opinion No. 444: choosing the route of hysterectomy for benign disease. Obstet Gynecol. 2009;114:1156–8.CrossRef
6.
Nieboer TE, Johnson N, Lethaby A, Tavender E, Curr E, Garry R, et al. Surgical approach to hysterectomy for benign gynaecological disease. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2009:1–132.
7.
Wright JD, Herzog TJ, Tsui J, et al. Nationwide trends in the performance of inpatient hysterectomy in the United States. Obstet Gynecol. 2013;122:233–41.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
8.
Moen M, Walter AJ, Harmanli O, Cornella J, Nihira K, et al. Considerations for evidenced based use of vaginal hysterectomy in benign gynecology. Obstet Gynecol. 2014;124:585–9.CrossRefPubMed
9.
Jacoby VL, Autry A, Jacobson G, Domush R, Nakagawa S, et al. Nationwide use of laparoscopic hysterectomy compared with abdominal and vaginal approaches. Obstet Gynecol. 2009;114:1041–8.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
10.
Payne TN. In reply to robotically assisted hysterectomy in patients with large uteri: outcomes in five community practices. Obstet Gynecol. 2010;116:194.CrossRef
11.
12.
Moen M, Noone M, Cholkeri-Singh A, Vassallo B, Locker B, et al. Progressive reduction in abdominal hysterectomy rates – impact of laparoscopy, robotics and surgeon factors. J Robot Surg. 2014;8:13–7.CrossRefPubMed
13.
Jelovesek JE, Walters MD, Korn A, et al. Establishing cutoff scores on assessments of surgical skills to determine surgical competence. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2010;203:81. e1-6.
14.
Altgassen C, Michels W, Schneider A. Learning laparoscopic assisted hysterectomy. Obstet Gynecol. 2004;104:308–13.CrossRefPubMed
15.
Tunitsky E, Citil A, Ayaz R, Esin S, Knee A, Harmanli O. Does surgical volume influence short-term outcomes of laparoscopic hysterectomy? Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2010;203:24. e1-6.CrossRefPubMed
16.
Twijnstra AR, Blikkendaal MD, van Zwet EW, van Kesteren PJ, de Kroon CD, Jansen FW. Predictors of successful surgical outcome in laparoscopic hysterectomy. Obstet Gynecol. 2012;119:700–8.CrossRefPubMed
17.
Rashid TG, Kini M, Ind TE. Comparing the learning curve for robotically assisted and straight stick laparoscopic procedures in surgical novices. Int J Med Robot. 2010;6:306–10.CrossRefPubMed
18.
Woelk JL, Casiano ER, Weaver AL, Gostout BS, Trabuco EC, Gebhart JB. The learning curve of robotic hysterectomy. Obstet Gynecol. 2013;121:87–95.CrossRefPubMed
19.
Pulliam SJ, Berkowitz LR. Smaller pieces of the hysterectomy pie: current challenges in resident surgical education. Obstet Gynecol. 2009;113:395–8.CrossRefPubMed
20.
Boyd LR, Novetsky AP, Curtin JP. Effect of surgical volume on route of hysterectomy and short term morbidity. Obstet Gynecol. 2010;116:909–15.CrossRefPubMed
21.
Rogo-Gupta LJ, Lewin SN, Kim JH, et al. The effect of surgical volume and outcomes and resource use with vaginal hysterectomy. Obstet Gynecol. 2010;116:1341–7.CrossRefPubMed
22.
Schiavone MB, Kuo EC, Naumann RW, Burke WM, Lewin SN, Neugut AI, et al. The commercialization of robotic surgery: unsubstantiated marketing of gynecologic surgery by hospitals. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2012;207:174. e1-7.PubMed
Metadata
Title
Why do we argue about route of hysterectomy? A call for dialogue
Author
Andrew J. Walter
Publication date
01-03-2017
Publisher
Springer London
Published in
International Urogynecology Journal / Issue 3/2017
Print ISSN: 0937-3462
Electronic ISSN: 1433-3023
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-016-3242-y

Other articles of this Issue 3/2017

International Urogynecology Journal 3/2017 Go to the issue

Review Article

Regenerative medicine provides alternative strategies for the treatment of anal incontinence

Special Contribution

Living with pelvic organ prolapse: voices of women from Amhara region, Ethiopia

Original Article

An obstetric sphincter injury risk identification system (OSIRIS): is this a clinically useful tool?

Urogynecology Digest

Urogynecology digest

Original Article

Do patient characteristics impact the relationship between anatomic prolapse and vaginal bulge symptoms?

Original Article

Reducing obstetric anal sphincter injuries using perineal support: our preliminary experience