Vaginal or laparoscopic hysterectomy: Do perioperative outcomes differ? A propensity score-matched analysis

Doortje Rademaker, Jon I. Einarsson, Judith A. F. Huirne, XiangMei Gu, Sarah L. Cohen

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review


Introduction: There are assertions that vaginal mode may be the preferred approach of minimally invasive hysterectomy, yet rates of laparoscopic hysterectomy (LH) continue to rise while vaginal hysterectomy (VH) rate remains relatively unchanged. The aim of this study is to compare the perioperative outcomes of LH vs VH. Material and methods: We identified women who underwent either LH or VH for benign indications between 2009 and 2015 at a large academic institution. A propensity score-matched analysis was used to adjust for differences between women undergoing VH vs LH. Outcome parameters were perioperative complications (both intraoperative and postoperative), operative time, blood loss, hospital length of stay, conversion and readmission. Results: A total of 1921 patients underwent either LH or VH during the study period. In all, 155 patients from each group were successfully matched using propensity score match analysis. While most intra- and postoperative characteristics did not differ between groups, LH was associated with lower blood loss during surgery (102.8 ± 166.5 mL vs 185.0 ± 179.0 mL, P < 0.001) and shorter hospital stay (0.9 ± 1 days vs 1.2 ± 0.9 days, P < 0.0001). Concomitant adnexal surgery was performed more frequently during LH (47.7% vs 12.3%, P < 0.0001), and concomitant prolapse surgery was performed more frequently at the time of VH (14.2% vs 68.4%, P < 0.0001). Conclusions: Both VH and LH have overall favorable perioperative outcomes; however, LH is associated with lower blood loss and a shorter hospital stay. The results support the trend toward increasing rates of laparoscopic approach to hysterectomy when appropriate.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1040-1045
Number of pages6
JournalActa Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica
Issue number8
Publication statusPublished - 1 Aug 2019

Cite this