Facts, Views & Vision
in ObGyn

Journal of the European Society for Gynaecological Endoscopy

esge_logo

Laparoscopic vs percutaneous hysterectomy in obese patients: a prospective evaluation

E. Perrone 1, F. Fanfani 1,2, C. Rossitto 1, S. Cianci 1, A. Fagotti 1,2, S. Restaino 1, C. Fedele 2, G. Scambia 1,2, S. Gueli Alletti 1.

1 Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, Rome, Italy;
2 Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Istituto di Clinica Ostetrica e Ginecologia, Rome, Italy.

Keywords:

Minimally invasive surgery, percutaneous approach, new technology, hysterectomy, gynecological surgery, personalized surgical treatment


Published online: Mar 31 2020

Abstract

Background: Treatment of obese female patients represents a real challenge. Indeed, obesity among women has reached epidemic levels not only elevating the cardiovascular and endocrinological risks, but also increasing the incidence of various gynecological pathologies (e.g. endometrial cancer and hyperplasia, uterine fibroids, genital prolapse) which commonly require hysterectomy as a surgical solution. In the last decade, minimally invasive surgery has emerged as an approach reducing the invasiveness of the standard laparoscopic surgical procedures while maintaining efficacy and feasibility. As such, in this study we aimed to evaluate the feasibility of percutaneous hysterectomy (PSS-H) approach in obese patients by reporting the first prospective comparison between the PSS-H to laparoscopic hysterectomy (LPS-H).

Methods: In this multicentric comparative prospective study, 45 patients affected by benign and malignant gynecological conditions were considered eligible for minimally invasive surgery (MIS). Fifteen patients received PSS-H and 30 LPS-H. All patients enrolled received a total hysterectomy ± bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy, with or without lymph nodal staging.

Results: No statistically significant differences were noted in operative time and estimated blood loss between the two groups. Four patients in PSS-H group and 3 in LPS-H group received lymph node staging. A multifunctional energy device was used in all PSS-H and 73.3% of LPS-H procedures (p=0.038). There were no conversions to laparotomy in either group and similarly there were no conversions to conventional laparoscopy in the PSS-H group. In the LPS-H group, there was one (3.3%) case of major bleeding( ≥ 500 mls). We recorded one vaginal cuff bleeding in PSS-H, whereas for LPS-H we reported 4 (13.3%) 30-days complications (p=0.651). No differences in visual analogue scale (VAS) score were recorded. A significant disparity was noted in cosmetic outcome at discharge (p=0.001), but not after 30 days.

Conclusion: We demonstrated for the first time, in a prospective comparison between PSS and LPS approaches, that PSS-H may represent a valid alternative to performing total hysterectomy in obese patients.