Is laparoscopic hysterectomy a waste of time?

Abstract

Laparoscopic hysterectomy (LH) is a way to avoid laparotomy. However, there is evidence that most women treated by abdominal hysterectomy are suitable for vaginal surgery. To test this hypothesis, and to determine the relative merits of laparoscopic and vaginal hysterectomy (VH) and the best technique for LH, we prospectively studied 98 women who had relative contraindications for vaginal surgery by traditional criteria. 75 underwent LH and 23 VH. The LH group included 22 women who had been assigned to this route of surgery as part of a prospective randomised controlled comparison with VH (23 women). Surgery was completed with the intended technique in 93.9% of cases. 5 women in the LH group (6.7%) and 2 in the VH group required laparotomy or additional procedures. In the prospective randomised study LH took longer than VH (mean duration 131 vs 77 min). VH was the faster procedure, irrespective of uterine size and need for oophorectomy. With LH, the operative time increased as more of the hysterectomy was carried out with laparoscopic rather than vaginal dissection. Complication rates, blood loss, analgesia requirements, and recovery were similar for the two techniques. Our study confirms that most hysterectomies could be performed vaginally, and that LH is a much slower procedure. If LH is done, it should be converted to a vaginal procedure as early as possible to reduce the overall operating time. LH does seem to be a waste of time for most patients.