Santos-López A, Gorbea-Chávez V, Rodríguez-Colorado S, Ramírez-Isarraraz C, Torres-Valdéz E, Gámez-Guerrero P

Language: Spanish
References: 23
Page: 148-154
PDF size: 360.46 Kb.

ABSTRACT

Objective: To compare surgical outcomes in women who underwent vaginal hysterectomy with enlarged (›12 weeks size) and non-prolapsed uterus utilizing different morcellation techniques with or without concomitant Deschamps needle use to vaginal hysterectomy for prolapsed uterus.
Material and methods: Retrospective cohort study in women who underwent vaginal hysterectomy performed between January 2009 and June 2014 in the National Institute of Perinatology. The study group comprised 48 women who had vaginal hysterectomy with enlarged and non-prolapsed uterus in which were utilized different morcellation techniques with or without concomitant Deschamps needle use and 50 women who had vaginal hysterectomy for prolapsed uterus served as control.
Results: The groups had statistical difference in age, number of cesarean sections, body mass index (BMI), grade of prolapse (Point Cx and D with POPQ quantification system) and surgical prediagnosis (p‹0.001); mean uterus weight was 182.5 g and 106 g, respectively (p‹0.001), as well as for transverse and antero-posterior dimensions and realization of morcellation with or without use of Deschamps needle. Both groups had no statistical difference in preoperative hemoglobin, concomitant surgeries for incontinence and prolapsed, estimated blood loss, operation time, length of stay and complications.
Conclusion: Vaginal hysterectomy utilizing different morcellation techniques with or without concomitant Deschamps needle use in women with enlarged and non-prolapsed uterus is safe, effective, and with similar complications to vaginal hysterectomies in prolapse uterus.

REFERENCES

1. Moen MD, Richter HE. Vaginal hysterectomy: past, present, and future. Int Urogynecology J 2014;25:1161-5.

2. Gendy R, Walsh CA, Walsh SR, Karantanis E. Vaginal hysterectomy versus total laparoscopic hysterectomy for benign disease: a metaanalysis of randomized controlled trials. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2011;204:388.e1-388.e8.

3. Paparella P, Sizzi O, Rossetti A, De Benedittis F, Paparella R. Vaginal hysterectomy in generally considered contraindications to vaginal surgery. Arch Gynecol Obstet 2004;270:104-9.

4. Cosson M, Querleu D, Dargent D. Vaginal surgery [en línea]. Dirección URL: . [Consulta: enero 2015].

5. Johnson N, Barlow D, Lethaby A, Tavender E, Curr L, Garry R. Methods of hysterectomy: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. BMJ 2005;330(7506):1478.

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:CD003677.

7. Goolab BD. Vaginal hysterectomy and relative merits over abdominal and laparoscopically assisted hysterectomy. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol 2013;27:393-413.

8. Sesti F, Cosi V, Calonzi F, Ruggeri V, Pietropolli A, Di Francesco L, et al. Randomized comparison of total laparoscopic, laparoscopically assisted vaginal and vaginal hysterectomies for myomatous uteri. Arch Gynecol Obstet 2014;290:485-91.

9. Nancy Campos Fombona. Histerectomía vaginal por termofusión en úteros sin prolapso. Rev Invest Med Sur Mex 2011;18:6-10.

10. Bump RC, Mattiasson A, Bø K, Brubaker LP, DeLancey JO, Klarskov P, et al. The standardization of terminology of female pelvic organ prolapse and pelvic floor dysfunction. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1996;175(1):10-7.

11. Nieto-Escarcega MR, Delgado-Urdapilleta J, Espinosa- Ibarra MR. Vaginal hysterectomy. The experience at the Instituto Nacional de Perinatología. Ginecol Obstet Mex 1994;62:255–8.

12. Kovac SR. Advances in Reconstructive Vaginal Surgery. 1st ed. Phyladelphya: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins 2012;104- 129.

13. Stone DE, Malik SA, Doerhman P, Videla FL. Döderlein–Krönig vaginal hysterectomy: an alternative to the traditional Heaney hysterectomy. Int Urogynecology J [en línea]. Dirección URL: . [Consulta: enero 2015].

14. Gollop TR, Santos AG dos, Rossi AGZ, Bianchi RF. Vaginal hysterectomy in non-prolapsed uteri: a 6-year experience. Einstein São Paulo Braz 2012;10:462-5.

15. Ray A, Pant L, Balsara R, Chaudhury R. Nondescent vaginal hysterectomy: a constantly improving surgical art. J Obstet Gynecol India 2011;61:182-8.

16. Cheung K, Pun T. Vaginal hysterectomies in patients without uterine prolapse: ten-year experience. Hong Kong Med J [en línea]. Dirección URL: . [Consulta agosto 2014].

17. Pakbaz M, Mogren I, Löfgren M. Outcomes of vaginal hysterectomy for uterovaginal prolapse: a population-based, retrospective, cross-sectional study of patient perceptions of results including sexual activity, urinary symptoms, and provided care. BMC Womens Health 2009;9:9.

18. Rodríguez-Colorado S, Alvarez-Mercado RL, Escobar-del Barco L, Castillo-Ramírez M, Kunhardt-Rasch J. [Clinical characteristics of women with genital prolapse]. Ginecol Obstet Mex 1996;64:356-8.

19. García-Pérez H, Harlow SD, Sampselle CM, Denman C. Measuring urinary incontinence in a population of women in northern Mexico: prevalence and severity. Int Urogynecology J 2013;24:847-54.

20. Al-Mandeel H, Al-Badr A. Management of occult stress urinary incontinence with prolapse surgery. Minerva Ginecol 2013;65:417-24.

21. Warda O, Ehab S, Mostafa E, Maged E, Tarek S. Optimizing vaginal hysterectomy in women with large volume nonprolapse uteri: a novel minimally-invasive “aneurysm needle clampless technique.”Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2014;179:1-4.

22. Fatania K, Vithayathil M, Newbold P, Yoong W. Vaginal versus abdominal hysterectomy for the enlarged nonprolapsed uterus: a retrospective cohort study. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2014;174:111-4.

23. Murphy AM, Tunitsky-Bitton E, Krlin RM, Barber MD, Goldman HB. Utility of postoperative laboratory studies after female pelvic reconstructive surgery. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2013;209:363.e1-363.e5.