Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26264829›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2015

Surgical approach to hysterectomy for benign gynaecological disease.

Johanna W M Aarts, Theodoor E Nieboer, Neil Johnson, Emma Tavender, Ray Garry, Ben Willem J Mol, Kirsten B Kluivers

9 registry-linked trialsOpen access · bronzeAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 9 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 342 papers, 11 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
342citing papers in PubMed, 11 pooled it
135.5field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT03373513 nawithdrawnnot on this mapstarted 2019, after this paper: background citation

Robotic-assisted Hysterectomy: Single- vs. Multi-port Laparoscopic Access

TypeinterventionalSponsorHerning HospitalRan2019 to 2022Enrolled0ConditionsActivity, Motor, Pain, WoundArmsRobotic single-site Hysterectomy, Laparoscopic hysterectomy
NCT03642743 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2018, after this paper: background citation

Patient Satisfaction With Two and Six Week Postoperative Follow up Appointments After Benign Minimally Invasive Hysterectomy Versus Two Week Postoperative Visit Alone: a Randomized Controlled Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of LouisvilleRan2018 to 2020Enrolled174ConditionsMinimally Invasive Surgery, Hysterectomy, Postoperative, SatisfactionArmspostoperative follow up appointment
NCT03662451 nawithdrawnnot on this mapstarted 2024, after this paper: background citation

Single Site Versus Multi Site Robotic Hysterectomy

TypeinterventionalSponsorHerning HospitalRan2024 to 2026Enrolled0ConditionsRehabilitation, Pain, Postoperative, Wound InfectionArmsRobotic assisted hysterectomy
NCT04156932 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2019, after this paper: background citation

Closure at the Origin of the Uterine Artery vs. Closure at the Cervico-isthmic Level in Laparoscopic Hysterectomy: a Randomized Clinical Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorOspedale degli Infermi di BiellaRan2019 to 2020Enrolled200ConditionsAnatomy, Laparoscopy, Uterine Artery, HysterectomyArmsuterine artery closure
NCT04184765 completednot on this mapstarted 2018, after this paper: background citation

Evaluation of Inflammatory Markers in Laparoscopic and Abdominal Hysterectomies: A Retrospective Study in Kocaeli, Northwest Turkey

TypeobservationalSponsormehmet ozsurmeliRan2018 to 2019Enrolled212ConditionsGynecologic Disease, Inflammation
NCT04886791 narecruitingnot on this mapstarted 2021, after this paper: background citation

Vaginal Hysterectomy Versus Vaginal Assisted NOTES Hysterectomy (VANH): a Randomised Controlled Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorZuyderland Medisch CentrumRan2021 to 2025Enrolled124ConditionsHysterectomy, Natural Orifice Transluminal Endoscopic Surgery, Vaginal HysterectomyArmsVaginal NOTES hysterectomy, Vaginal hysterectomy
NCT05435508 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2024, after this paper: background citation

Efficacy in Reducing Anxiety, Stress, and Pain Levels Through Preanesthetic Assessment and Pain Neuroscience Education in Patients Undergoing Elective Total Abdominal Hysterectomy: A Randomized Clinical Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorInstituto Neurociencia Del DolorRan2024 to 2025Enrolled62ConditionsPain, Chronic, Pain, Postoperative, Anesthesia, SurgeryArmsPain Neuroscience Education, Usual care
NCT06138197 completednot on this mapstarted 2024, after this paper: background citation

Comparative Evaluation of Three Surgical Robotic Platforms for the Laparoscopic Hysterectomy Procedure: Post Market Clinical Follow Up Study

TypeobservationalSponsorUniversita di VeronaRan2024 to 2024Enrolled150ConditionsHysterectomyArmsRobotic-assisted hysterectomy
NCT07465822 active not recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2025, after this paper: background citation

The Learning Curve of a Gynecology and Obstetrics Resident Performing Vaginal Natural Orifice Transluminal Endoscopic Surgery (V-NOTES) Hysterectomy in a University Hospital

Typeobservational_patient_registrySponsorCukurova UniversityRan2025 to 2026Enrolled19ConditionsAbnormal Uterine Bleeding, Unspecified, Benign Gynecological Disease, Adenomyosis of Uterus, Uterine Leiomyomas
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

342 citing papers in PubMed, 11 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 1,815 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Early versus delayed oral feeding after major gynaecologic surgery.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2024
    Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Surgical approach to hysterectomy for benign gynaecological disease.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2023
    Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. A Systematic Review of Clinical Trials Assessing Sexuality in Hysterectomized Patients.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021
    Pooled it
  11. Pooled it
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Surgical management of uterine fibroids.International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2026
    Review
  20. Da VinciSurgical endoscopy · 2026
    Observational

282 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Johanna W M AartsDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Center, Geert Grooteplein 10, Nijmegen, Netherlands, 6500HB.
Theodoor E Nieboer
Neil Johnson
Emma Tavender
Ray Garry
Ben Willem J Mol
Kirsten B Kluivers
Radboud University Nijmegen · NLUniversity of Adelaide · AUMonash University · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe four approaches to hysterectomy for benign disease are abdominal hysterectomy (AH), vaginal hysterectomy (VH), laparoscopic hysterectomy (LH) and robotic-assisted hysterectomy (RH).

objectivesTo assess the effectiveness and safety of different surgical approaches to hysterectomy for women with benign gynaecological conditions. SEARCH

methodsWe searched the following databases (from inception to 14 August 2014) using the Ovid platform: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL); MEDLINE; EMBASE; Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) and PsycINFO. We also searched relevant citation lists. We used both indexed and free-text terms. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in which clinical outcomes were compared between one surgical approach to hysterectomy and another. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: At least two review authors independently selected trials, assessed risk of bias and performed data extraction. Our primary outcomes were return to normal activities, satisfaction, quality of life, intraoperative visceral injury and major long-term complications (i.e. fistula, pelvi-abdominal pain, urinary dysfunction, bowel dysfunction, pelvic floor condition and sexual dysfunction). MAIN

resultsWe included 47 studies with 5102 women. The evidence for most comparisons was of low or moderate quality. The main limitations were poor reporting and imprecision. Vaginal hysterectomy (VH) versus abdominal hysterectomy (AH) (nine RCTs, 762 women)Return to normal activities was shorter in the VH group (mean difference (MD) -9.5 days, 95% confidence interval (CI) -12.6 to -6.4, three RCTs, 176 women, I(2) = 75%, moderate quality evidence). There was no evidence of a difference between the groups for the other primary outcomes. Laparoscopic hysterectomy (LH) versus AH (25 RCTs, 2983 women)Return to normal activities was shorter in the LH group (MD -13.6 days, 95% CI -15.4 to -11.8; six RCTs, 520 women, I(2) = 71%, low quality evidence), but there were more urinary tract injuries in the LH group (odds ratio (OR) 2.4, 95% CI 1.2 to 4.8, 13 RCTs, 2140 women, I(2) = 0%, low quality evidence). There was no evidence of a difference between the groups for the other primary outcomes. LH versus VH (16 RCTs, 1440 women)There was no evidence of a difference between the groups for any primary outcomes. Robotic-assisted hysterectomy (RH) versus LH (two RCTs, 152 women)There was no evidence of a difference between the groups for any primary outcomes. Neither of the studies reported satisfaction rates or quality of life.Overall, the number of adverse events was low in the included studies. AUTHORS'

conclusionsAmong women undergoing hysterectomy for benign disease, VH appears to be superior to LH and AH, as it is associated with faster return to normal activities. When technically feasible, VH should be performed in preference to AH because of more rapid recovery and fewer febrile episodes postoperatively. Where VH is not possible, LH has some advantages over AH (including more rapid recovery and fewer febrile episodes and wound or abdominal wall infections), but these are offset by a longer operating time. No advantages of LH over VH could be found; LH had a longer operation time, and total laparoscopic hysterectomy (TLH) had more urinary tract injuries. Of the three subcategories of LH, there are more RCT data for laparoscopic-assisted vaginal hysterectomy and LH than for TLH. Single-port laparoscopic hysterectomy and RH should either be abandoned or further evaluated since there is a lack of evidence of any benefit over conventional LH. Overall, the evidence in this review has to be interpreted with caution as adverse event rates were low, resulting in low power for these comparisons. The surgical approach to hysterectomy should be discussed and decided in the light of the relative benefits and hazards. These benefits and hazards seem to be dependent on surgical expertise and this may influence the decision. In conclusion, when VH is not feasible, LH may avoid the need for AH, but LH is associated with more urinary tract injuries. There is no evidence that RH is of benefit in this population. Preferably, the surgical approach to hysterectomy should be decided by the woman in discussion with her surgeon.

Indexed as

Robotic Surgical ProceduresFemaleGenital Diseases, FemaleHumansHysterectomyHysterectomy, VaginalLaparoscopyRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicRecovery of Function

Identifiers

PMID26264829
PMCPMC6984437
OpenAlexW1993790913

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

and 3 more above

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.