LAVH superior to TVH when concomitant salpingo-oophorectomy is intended in prolapse hysterectomy: a comparative cohort study.

Abstract

This comparative cohort study evaluated the influence of surgical route for prolapse hysterectomy (vaginal or laparoscopically assisted) on the achievement of intended elective salpingo-oophorectomy, which was a procedural goal planned with the patient before primary vaginal native-tissue prolapse surgery. Consecutive patients who underwent total vaginal hysterectomy (TVH; n = 163) or laparoscopically assisted vaginal hysterectomy (LAVH; n = 144) and vaginal native-tissue repair for pelvic organ prolapse at Jena University Hospital were enrolled. Peri- and postoperative parameters, including Clavien-Dindo (CD) classification of surgical complications, were compared between groups using Student's t test, Fisher's exact test, and multivariable regression. Patient characteristics were similar, except that grade IV prolapse was more common in the LAVH group (p < 0.001). The following parameters differed between the TVH and LAVH groups: concomitant salpingectomy (1.2% vs. 34%) and salpingo-oophorectomy (45% vs. 66%), non-performance of intended salpingo-oophorectomy (36% vs. 0% OR 0.006, 95% CI < 0.001-0.083), adhesiolysis (0% vs. 44%), CD II-III complications (51% vs. 14.6% p < 0.001), operating time (153 ± 61 vs. 142 ± 27min), and postoperative in-patient days (9.02 ± 4.9 vs. 4.99 ± 0.96; all p < 0.001). LAVH enabled the safe performance of planned concomitant salpingo-oophorectomy in all cases. To achieve the procedural goal in such cases, laparoscopic assistance in prolapse hysterectomy should be considered.