Advertisement

Hysterectomy pp 499-553 | Cite as

Total Laparoscopic Hysterectomy for the Small and Normal-Sized Uterus

  • Ibrahim AlkatoutEmail author
Chapter
  • 872 Downloads

Abstract

The basic concept of laparoscopic hysterectomy was developed by Kurt Semm and Liselotte Mettler in the 1980s. However, the instruments and techniques used at the time (endotherm and loop) did not keep pace with the development of intrafascial hysterectomy. Advancements in instruments, technical support, and consistent training have considerably improved the procedure.

Total laparoscopic hysterectomy for the normal-sized uterus has become a standard operation with low complication rates and a regular learning curve. Laparoscopic hysterectomy is associated with reduced blood loss, shorter hospital stays, earlier return to normal activities, and fewer infections. Its major advantage over vaginal hysterectomy is the possibility to simultaneously treat comorbidities, such as endometriosis or adhesions. Laparoscopic supracervical/subtotal hysterectomy is a useful alternative. Its advantages and disadvantages need to be discussed with the patient; the final decision is made jointly by the doctor and the patient.

Antibiotic prophylaxis should be given for all types of hysterectomy. The first step is a correct assessment of the size and location of the uterus (clinical examination and ultrasound scan). The next step is to determine the positions of trocars and the manipulator. The following questions have to be answered: (1) Are disposable instruments required? (2) Are more than two ancillary trocars necessary? What trocar diameter should be used and what is the best location? (3) Is morcellation necessary or can the uterus be removed through the vagina? (4) Do any other operative steps have to be considered, such as the treatment of endometriosis, adnexal masses, or adhesions? (5) How is the vaginal cuff to be closed?

Oophorectomy and/or salpingectomy should be considered; their advantages and disadvantages should be included in the patient’s counseling.

Keywords

Laparoscopy Hysterectomy Total laparoscopic hysterectomy Vaginalclosure Prolapse prophylaxis 

References

  1. 1.
    Kovac SR. Route of hysterectomy: an evidence-based approach. Clin Obstet Gynecol. 2014;57(1):58–71.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Schollmeyer T et al. Hysterectomy trends over a 9-year period in an endoscopic teaching center. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2014;126(1):45–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Lefebvre G et al. SOGC clinical guidelines. Hysterectomy. J Obstet Gynaecol Can. 2002;24(1):37–61. quiz 74–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Stang A, Merrill RM, Kuss O. Hysterectomy in Germany: a DRG-based nationwide analysis, 2005–2006. Dtsch Arztebl Int. 2011;108(30):508–14.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Brummer TH, Seppala TT, Harkki PS. National learning curve for laparoscopic hysterectomy and trends in hysterectomy in Finland 2000–2005. Hum Reprod. 2008;23(4):840–5.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Prevention, C.f.D.C.a., Women’s reproductive health: hysterectomy fact sheet, D.o.R. Health, Editor. 2009: 1600 Clifton Rd. Atlanta, GA 30333, USA.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hanstede MM et al. Regional and temporal variation in hysterectomy rates and surgical routes for benign diseases in the Netherlands. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2012;91(2):220–5.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Alkatout I et al. Precarious preoperative diagnostics and hints for the laparoscopic excision of uterine adenomatoid tumors: two exemplary cases and literature review. Fertil Steril. 2011;95(3):1119 e5–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Alkatout I et al. Principles and safety measures of electrosurgery in laparoscopy. JSLS. 2012;16(1):130–9.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hughes E, et al., Ovulation suppression for endometriosis.Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2007;(3): p. CD000155.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Lethaby A, V Ivanova, NP Johnson. Total versus subtotal hysterectomy for benign gynaecological conditions.Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2006;(2): p. CD004993.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Thakar R et al. Outcomes after total versus subtotal abdominal hysterectomy. N Engl J Med. 2002;347(17):1318–25.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Gorlero F et al. Hysterectomy and women satisfaction: total versus subtotal technique. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2008;278(5):405–10.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Roovers JP et al. Hysterectomy and sexual wellbeing: prospective observational study of vaginal hysterectomy, subtotal abdominal hysterectomy, and total abdominal hysterectomy. BMJ. 2003;327(7418):774–8.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Ascher-Walsh CJ et al. Location of adenomyosis in total hysterectomy specimens. J Am Assoc Gynecol Laparosc. 2003;10(3):360–2.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Sarmini OR, Lefholz K, Froeschke HP. A comparison of laparoscopic supracervical hysterectomy and total abdominal hysterectomy outcomes. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2005;12(2):121–4.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    BMI, Demography Report: Report of the German federal government on the demographic situation and future development of the country 2011, German Federal Ministry of the Interior.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Nygaard I, Bradley C, Brandt D. Pelvic organ prolapse in older women: prevalence and risk factors. Obstet Gynecol. 2004;104(3):489–97.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Olsen AL et al. Epidemiology of surgically managed pelvic organ prolapse and urinary incontinence. Obstet Gynecol. 1997;89(4):501–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Symmonds RE, Pratt JH. Vaginal prolapse following hysterectomy. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1960;79:899–909.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Toozs-Hobson P, Boos K, Cardozo L. Management of vaginal vault prolapse. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 1998;105(1):13–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Marchionni M et al. True incidence of vaginal vault prolapse. Thirteen years of experience. J Reprod Med. 1999;44(8):679–84.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Swift SE, Pound T, Dias JK. Case-control study of etiologic factors in the development of severe pelvic organ prolapse. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct. 2001;12(3):187–92.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Elessawy M et al. The incidence of complications by hysterectomy for benign disease in correlation to an assumed preoperative score. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2014;292(1):127–33.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Reich H. Laparoscopic oophorectomy and salpingo-oophorectomy in the treatment of benign tubo-ovarian disease. Int J Fertil. 1987;32(3):233–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Mettler L et al. Comparative evaluation of classical intrafascial-supracervical hysterectomy (CISH) with transuterine mucosal resection as performed by pelviscopy and laparotomy–our first 200 cases. Surg Endosc. 1995;9(4):418–23.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Semm K. Hysterectomy via laparotomy or pelviscopy. A new CASH method without colpotomy. Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd. 1991;51(12):996–1003.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Hohl MK, Hauser N. Safe total intrafascial laparoscopic (TAIL) hysterectomy: a prospective cohort study. Gynecol Surg. 2010;7(3):231–9.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Schüssler B, Scheidel P, Hohl MK. Hysterektomie update. Frauenheilkunde aktuell. 2008;3:4–12.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Veress J. Neues Instrument zur Ausführung von Brust- und Bauchpunktionen und Pneumothoraxbehandlung. Dtsch Med Wochenschr. 1938;64:1480–1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Alkatout I et al. Abdominal anatomy in the context of port placement and trocars. J Turk Ger Gynecol Assoc. 2015;16(4):241–51.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Kramer L. Mixed reviews on removing fallopian tubes to prevent ovarian cancer. CMAJ. 2013;185(9):E391–2.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Kurman RJ, Shih Ie M. Molecular pathogenesis and extraovarian origin of epithelial ovarian cancer–shifting the paradigm. Hum Pathol. 2011;42(7):918–31.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Caceres A, McCarus SD. Fallopian tube prolapse after total laparoscopic hysterectomy. Obstet Gynecol. 2008;112(2 Pt 2):494–5.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Altman D et al. Pelvic organ prolapse surgery following hysterectomy on benign indications. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2008;198(5):572 e1–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Thompson JD, Warshaw J. Hysterectomy. In: Rock JA, Thompson JD, editors. Te Linde's Operative Gynecology. Philadelphia-New York: Lippincott Raven; 1996. p. 771–854.Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    van Herendael B. Strategies to prevent vaginal vault descent during hysterectomy. In: Mettler L, editor. Manual of new hysterectomy techniques. New Delhi: Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) Ltd; 2007. p. 82–5.Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Hur HC et al. Incidence and patient characteristics of vaginal cuff dehiscence after different modes of hysterectomies. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2007;14(3):311–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Cruikshank SH, Kovac SR. Randomized comparison of three surgical methods used at the time of vaginal hysterectomy to prevent posterior enterocele. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1999;180(4):859–65.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Wall LL. A technique for modified McCall culdeplasty at the time of abdominal hysterectomy. J Am Coll Surg. 1994;178(5):507–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Ostrzenski A. A new, simplified posterior culdoplasty and vaginal vault suspension during abdominal hysterectomy. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 1995;49(1):25–34.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Gynecology and ObstetricsKiel School of Gynaecological Endoscopy, University Hospitals Schleswig-HolsteinKielGermany

Personalised recommendations