ArticleFacts, views & vision in ObGyn2024
Defining a Uterine Extraction Score based on a Volume/Access Ratio in Total Hysterectomy: a retrospective cohort study.
Article in Facts, views & vision in ObGyn, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
- Impact of Body Mass Index on Perioperative Outcomes in Robotic-Assisted Total Hysterectomy: A Retrospective Cohort Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Transvaginal in-bag directional morcellation with endometrial preservation for large uteri: an initial clinical feasibility study.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Regardless of the technique used, extraction of the uterus is a crucial step in hysterectomy. There is currently no scoring system to predict its feasibility. Objectives: Our main objective was to determine a predictive score of uterine extraction feasibility to optimise surgical planning of total hysterectomy. As secondary objectives, we examined the correlation between uterine volume predicted by preoperative ultrasound and the final weight of the surgical specimen and analysed the impact of the uterine extraction modality on operative and hospitalisation times. Materials and Methods: We defined a Uterine Extraction Score (UES) based on the ratio between uterine sizes and vaginal access. This score was retrospectively applied to a cohort of 178 patients who were hysterectomised for benign conditions between January 2019 and December 2022. Main outcome measures: The UES allows identification of three groups of decreasing feasibility of vaginal extraction, symbolised by traffic light colours: green - vaginal extraction without morcellation, orange -vaginal extraction with morcellation, red - abdominal morcellation by mini-laparotomy or primary laparotomy. Results: The results show that the UES--predicted, and the observed routes of extraction concord in 92% of cases. There is a strong correlation between estimated volume and final uterine weight. Uterine morcellation lengthens the operative time and the hospital stay. Conclusions: The UES seems to be a reliable tool to predict the route of uterine extraction in total hysterectomy. What is new?: The development of a new scoring system empowers surgeons with decisive information to enhance perioperative outcomes.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.