ReviewCureus2026
Laparoscopic Retrograde Hysterectomy: A Review of Techniques, Indications, and Outcomes.
Review in Cureus, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Laparoscopic retrograde hysterectomy (LRH) represents an innovative minimally invasive approach for managing complex pelvic pathology where conventional techniques are contraindicated. This review synthesizes current evidence regarding its techniques, indications, and outcomes. LRH employs a strategic caudal-to-cephalad dissection, prioritizing early identification of ureters and uterine vessels before addressing fundal attachments. Primary indications include severe endometriosis with obliterated cul-de-sac, large uterine size (>300 g), multiple previous surgeries with dense adhesions, and distorted pelvic anatomy. Outcomes demonstrate significant advantages, including reduced conversion rates to laparotomy (0-2.9%), acceptable operative times (66-285 minutes), minimal blood loss (79-450 mL), and short hospital stays (two to six days). The technique maintains low complication rates (2.2-4.7%) despite challenging conditions. However, LRH requires advanced laparoscopic skills and has a substantial learning curve (~65 cases). Widespread adoption necessitates structured training programs and further comparative studies. LRH effectively expands minimally invasive options for complex gynecological surgery, demonstrating particular utility in frozen pelvis scenarios while preserving the benefits of laparoscopy.
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.