Manchester Procedure Vs. Vaginal Hysterectomy for Uterine Prolapse

Abstract

The Manchester procedure (MP) was compared with vaginal hysterectomy (VH) to determine whether any differences regarding patient demographics or operative or postoperative outcome could be found between the two techniques. A retrospective chart analysis was done comparing data from 88 consecutive MP to 105 randomly selected VH patients. All the operations were performed for uterine prolapse at Mount Sinai Hospital between 1984 and 1988. MP patients, when compared to VH patients, were more likely to be older and postmenopausal at the time of surgery and to have a private physician. MP patients were less likely to have significant medical illnesses than were VH patients. Statistically significant differences between MP and VH were found for operative time (100 vs 130 minutes, respectively) and blood loss (200 vs. 300 mL, respectively) (P < .001). This difference was not dependent on the performance of anterior or posterior repair. MP was associated with shorter operative time and less blood loss when compared to VH. This, coupled with apparently similar operative outcomes, suggests the use of MP as an alternative to VH in the absence of uterine pathology in appropriate candidates with uterine prolapse. Prospective, controlled, long-term studies comparing the operative results of these two procedures are needed.