Vaginal Hysterectomy Versus Two-dimensional and Three-Dimensional Total Laparoscopic Hysterectomy in Women With Benign Uterine Diseases
Objectives: This study aimed to compare the outcomes of vaginal hysterectomy (VH) and two- and three-dimensional total laparoscopic hysterectomy (2D TLH, 3D TLH) in women with benign uterine diseases.
Methods: A retrospective, randomized study was conducted at the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Bagcilar Training and Research Hospital between 2010 and 2012. Overall, 99 women underwent VH, 68 underwent 2D TLH, and 41 underwent 3D TLH. Patients’ ages, parities, uterine weights, pre- and postoperative hemoglobin (Hb) and hematocrit (Htc) values, operating times, complication rates, and hospitalization duration were compared.
Results: A statistically significant difference was found among the groups in terms of patients’ ages, parities, uterine weights, operating times, and hospitalization duration (p<0.05). Patients who underwent 3D TLH were younger and had lesser parities, greater uterine weights, and shorter operating times. The hospitalization duration was similar between the 2D and 3D TLH groups (average, 2 days; min, 1 day; and max, 8–10 days); however, it was shorter than the VH group (average, 3 days; min, 3 days; and max, 8 days). No statistically significant difference was observed among the groups in terms of the pre- and postoperative Hb/Htc values and complication rates (p>0.05).
Conclusion: VH still remains the preferred procedure for patients with uterine prolapse and patients who require pelvic repair. 3D TLH offers quick operation with less complication rates and morbidity and reduces the hospitalization duration. Because of more favorable outcomes, we presume that 3D TLH may replace 2D TLH in the near future.
1.Schindlbeck C, Klauser K, Dian D, Janni W, Friese K. Comparison of total laparoscopic, vaginal and abdominal hysterectomy. Arch Gynecol Obstet 2008;277:331–7. [CrossRef]
2. Lepine LA, Hillis SD, Marchbanks PA, Koonin LM, Morrow B, Kieke BA, et al. Hysterectomy surveillance-United States, 1980-1993. MMWR CDC Surveill Summ 1997;46:1–15.
3. Candiani M, Izzo S, Bulfoni A, Riparini J, Ronzoni S, Marconi A. Laparoscopic vs vaginal hysterectomy for benign pathology. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2009;200:368.e1–7. [CrossRef]
4. Ng CC, Chern BS. Total laparoscopic hysterectomy: a 5-year experience. Arch Gynecol Obstet 2007;276:613–8. [CrossRef]
5. Gimbel H, Settnes A, Tabor A. Hysterectomy on benign indication in Denmark 1988-1998. A register based trend analysis. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2001;80:267–72. [CrossRef]
6. Walsh CA, Walsh SR, Tang TY, Slack M. Total abdominal hysterectomy versus total laparoscopic hysterectomy for benign disease: a meta-analysis. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2009;144:3–7. [CrossRef]
7. Garry R, Fountain J, Mason S, Hawe J, Napp V, Abbott J, et al. The eVALuate study: two parallel randomised trials, one comparing laparoscopic with abdominal hysterectomy, the other comparing laparoscopic with vaginal hysterectomy. BMJ 2004;328:129. [CrossRef]
8. Summitt RL Jr, Stovall TG, Lipscomb GH, Ling FW. Randomized comparison of laparoscopy-assisted vaginal hysterectomy with standard vaginal hysterectomy in an outpatient setting. Obstet Gynecol 1992;80:895–901.
9. Taffinder N, Smith SG, Huber J, Russell RC, Darzi A. The effect of a second-generation 3D endoscope on the laparoscopic precision of novices and experienced surgeons. Surg Endosc 1999;13:1087–92. [CrossRef]
10. Wilhelm D, Reiser S, Kohn N, Witte M, Leiner U, Mühlbach L, et al. Comparative evaluation of HD 2D/3D laparoscopic monitors and benchmarking to a theoretically ideal 3D pseudodisplay: even well-experienced laparoscopists perform better with 3D. Surg Endosc 2014;28:2387–97. [CrossRef]
11. Lusch A, Bucur PL, Menhadji AD, Okhunov Z, Liss MA, Perez-Lanzac A, et al. Evaluation of the impact of three-dimensional vision on laparoscopic performance. J Endourol 2014;28:261–6. [CrossRef]
12. Kong SH, Oh BM, Yoon H, Ahn HS, Lee HJ, Chung SG, et al. Comparison of two- and three-dimensional camera systems in laparoscopic performance: a novel 3D system with one camera. Surg Endosc 2010;24:1132–43. [CrossRef]
13. Smith R, Schwab K, Day A, Rockall T, Ballard K, Bailey M, et al. Effect of passive polarizing three-dimensional displays on surgical performance for experienced laparoscopic surgeons. Br J Surg 2014;101:1453–9. [CrossRef]
14. Sahu D, Mathew MJ, Reddy PK. 3D Laparoscopy - Help or Hype; Initial Experience of A Tertiary Health Centre. J Clin Diagn Res 2014;8:NC01–3.
15. Falk V, Mintz D, Grünenfelder J, Fann JI, Burdon TA. Influence of three-dimensional vision on surgical telemanipulator performance. Surg Endosc 2001;15:1282–8. [CrossRef]
16. Kihara K, Fujii Y, Masuda H, Saito K, Koga F, Matsuoka Y, et al. New three-dimensional head-mounted display system, TMDU-S-3D system, for minimally invasive surgery application: procedures for gasless single-port radical nephrectomy. Int J Urol 2012;19:886–9. [CrossRef]
17. Zdichavsky M, Schmidt A, Luithle T, Manncke S, Fuchs J. Three-dimensional laparoscopy and thoracoscopy in children and adults: A prospective clinical trial. Minim Invasive Ther Allied Technol 2015;24:154–60. [CrossRef]
18. Kunert W, Storz P, Kirschniak A. For 3D laparoscopy: a step toward advanced surgical navigation: how to get maximum benefit from 3D vision. Surg Endosc 2013;27:696–9. [CrossRef]
19. Cicione A, Autorino R, Breda A, De Sio M, Damiano R, Fusco F, et al. Three-dimensional vs standard laparoscopy: comparative assessment using a validated program for laparoscopic urologic skills. Urology 2013;82:1444–50. [CrossRef]
20. Alaraimi B, El Bakbak W, Sarker S, Makkiyah S, Al-Marzouq A, Goriparthi R, et al. A randomized prospective study comparing acquisition of laparoscopic skills in three-dimensional (3D) vs. two-dimensional (2D) laparoscopy. World J Surg 2014;38:2746–52. [CrossRef]
21. Byrn JC, Schluender S, Divino CM, Conrad J, Gurland B, Shlasko E, et al. Three-dimensional imaging improves surgical performance for both novice and experienced operators using the da Vinci Robot System. Am J Surg 2007;193:519–22.
22. Dubrowski A, Park J, Moulton CA, Larmer J, MacRae H. A comparison of single- and multiple-stage approaches to teaching laparoscopic suturing. Am J Surg 2007;193:269-73. [CrossRef]
23. ACOG Committee Opinion No. 444: choosing the route of hysterectomy for benign disease. Obstet Gynecol 2009;114:1156– 8. [CrossRef]
24. Mebes I, Diedrich K, Banz-Jansen C. Total laparoscopic hysterectomy without uterine manipulator at big uterus weight (>280 g). Arch Gynecol Obstet 2012;286:131–4. [CrossRef]
25. Aarts JW, Nieboer TE, Johnson N, Tavender E, Garry R, Mol BW, et al. Surgical approach to hysterectomy for benign gynaecological disease. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2015:CD003677.
26. Candiani M, Izzo S. Laparoscopic versus vaginal hysterectomy for benign pathology. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol 2010;22:304– 8. [CrossRef]
27. 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.e1–8. [CrossRef]
28. Morton M, Cheung VY, Rosenthal DM. Total laparoscopic versus vaginal hysterectomy: a retrospective comparison. J Obstet Gynaecol Can 2008;30:1039–44. [CrossRef]
29. Johnson N, Barlow D, Lethaby A, Tavender E, Curr E, Garry R. Surgical approach to hysterectomy for benign gynaecological disease. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2006:CD003677.
30. Johnson N, Barlow D, Lethaby A, Tavender E, Curr E, Garry R. Surgical approach to hysterectomy for benign gynaecological disease. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2005:CD003677.
31. Garry R, Phillips G. How safe is the laparoscopic approach to hysterectomy? Gynaecol Endosc 1995;4:77–9.
32. Härkki-Sirén P, Sjöberg J, Mäkinen J, Heinonen PK, Kauko M, Tomás E, et al. Finnish national register of laparoscopic hysterectomies: a review and complications of 1165 operations. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1997;176:118–22. [CrossRef]
33. Cook JR, O'Shea RT, Seman EI. Laparovaginal hysterectomy: a decade of evolution. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol 2004;44:111– 6. [CrossRef]
34. O’Shea RT, Petrucco O, Gordon S, Seman E. Adelaide laparoscopic hysterectomy audit (1991-1998): realistic complication rates. Gynaecol Endosc 2000;9:369–72. [CrossRef]
35. Saceanu S, Cela V, Surlin V, Angelescu CM, Patrascu S, Georgescu I, et al. Hysterectomy for benign uterine pathology: comparison between robotic assisted laparoscopy, classic laparoscopy and laparotomy. Chirurgia (Bucur) 2013;108:346– 50.