[Laparoscopic supracervical hysterectomy versus laparoscopic total hysterectomy: a prospective randomized study]

Abstract

Aim: The aim of this study was to compare surgical complications and clinical outcomes after supracervical versus total laparoscopic hysterectomy for the control of abnormal uterine bleeding or symptomatic uterine leiomyomata.

Methods: We conducted a prospective randomized trial on 141 patients who had laparoscopic hysterectomy for symptomatic uterine leiomyomata, abnormal bleeding refractory to hormonal treatment, or both. Patients were randomly assigned to receive a supracervical or total laparoscopic hysterectomy. We compared surgical complications and clinical outcomes for 2 years after randomization.

Results: Seventy-one participants were assigned to supracervical laparoscopic hysterectomy (SLH) and 70 to total laparoscopic hysterectomy (TLH). Hysterectomy by either techniques led to statistically significant reductions in most symptoms, including pelvic pain or pressure, back pain and urinary incontinence. Patients assigned to SLH tended to have more hospital readmissions than those randomized to TLH. There were no statistically significant differences in the rate of complications, degree of symptoms improvement, or activity limitation. Participants weighing more than 100 kg at study entry were more than twice as likely to be readmitted to the hospital during the 2-year of follow-up (OR 2.48, 95% CI 0.11; 1.91, P=0.04).

Conclusions: We did not observe statistically significant differences between SLH and TLH in surgical complications and clinical outcomes during the 2-years of follow-up.