ReviewCureus2024
Comparative Analysis of Total Laparoscopic Hysterectomy Versus Non-descent Vaginal Hysterectomy for Benign Uterine Pathologies in Women: A Systematic Review.
Review in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Vaginal Cuff Closure with a Figure-of-Eight Suture in Total Laparoscopic Hysterectomy: Outcome from 173 Consecutive Cases.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2026Observational
- Modified Use of Classical Rein Technique in Laparoscopic Hysterectomy for Uterine Manipulation.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2025Article
- Integration of Artificial Intelligence in Dentistry: A Systematic Review of Educational and Clinical Implications.Cureus · 2025Review
- Revolutionizing Surgical Precision: A Case Report on the Articulating Endoscopic Linear Cutter for Laparoscopic Total Hysterectomy.International journal of women's health · 2025Article
- Review
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Hysterectomy, which can be conducted through abdominal or vaginal routes, is one of the most common gynecological procedures performed worldwide. When the patient is not able to undergo a vaginal hysterectomy due to contraindications involving a narrow pelvis or endometriosis and technical difficulties, laparoscopic removal of the uterus is the recommended method over abdominal hysterectomy. Additionally, the type of surgery depends on the expertise of the surgeon. Therefore, this systematic review aimed to evaluate different measures related to total laparoscopic (TLH) versus non-descent vaginal hysterectomy (NDVH) in women with benign uterine pathologies. ScienceDirect, PubMed, and Google Scholar databases were searched from 2019 to 2023 for a literature review using keywords including "Non-descent Vaginal Hysterectomy," AND "Total Laparoscopic Hysterectomy," AND "Benign Uterine Pathologies." This systematic review includes five studies based on the selection criteria. The data were extracted and a quality assessment of the studies was performed. The review concluded that NDVH has an advantage over TLH as a scarless surgery performed in a very short period and with minimum blood loss with fewer complications and in terms of cost-effectiveness. However, the postoperative parameters and satisfaction with the TLH technique were better than the NDVH technique, but the procedure was much more time-consuming and needed laparoscopic surgical expertise. The duration of hospitalization in NDVH and TLH was nearly the same. Furthermore, both techniques could be employed for salpingo-oophorectomy or when there are adnexal masses and adhesions present; however, TLH may be the best course of action.
Indexed as
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.