ArticleJournal of the Chinese Medical Association : JCMA2026
Laparoscopic-assisted versus conventional vaginal hysterectomy for gender-affirming surgery in female-to-male transgender men.
Article in Journal of the Chinese Medical Association : JCMA, 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundStudies comparing the surgical routes for sex-affirming hysterectomy in female-to-male (FtM) transgender individuals remain limited. This study compared the perioperative outcomes of vaginal total hysterectomy (VTH) and laparoscopic-assisted vaginal hysterectomy (LAVH) in an Asian FtM cohort.
methodsWe retrospectively reviewed the data of individuals who were FtM transgender and underwent sex-affirming hysterectomy with bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy at a tertiary referral center between January 2016 and May 2026. Patients who underwent combined major sex-affirming procedures, vaginal natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (vNOTES) hysterectomy, or vaginectomy alone were excluded. The perioperative outcomes and complications in the VTH and LAVH groups within 14 days were compared.
resultsThe study included 132 of 153 screened patients: 89 underwent VTH and 43 underwent LAVH. The baseline characteristics were comparable, although the body mass index (BMI) of the LAVH group was higher. The duration of surgery was significantly longer for the LAVH group than for the VTH group (152.4 ± 78.7 vs 121.2 ± 57.6 minutes; p = 0.024). Immediate postoperative pain at 2 hours was milder after LAVH than after VTH (4.1 ± 0.9 vs 4.6 ± 1.0; p = 0.007), but pain scores were comparable at 24 and 48 hours. Estimated blood loss, hospital stay, Foley catheter duration, and time to first flatus were similar. The overall complication rate was significantly lower in the LAVH group than in the VTH group (18.6% vs 37.1%, p = 0.032). One patient with VTH required conversion to abdominal hysterectomy because of severe adhesions, and one had incomplete bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy.
conclusionLAVH was associated with fewer perioperative complications and less immediate postoperative pain than VTH, although it required a longer operative time in individuals who were FtM transgender. The improved pelvic visualization and adnexal access afforded by LAVH may offer technical advantages when the pelvic anatomy is challenging. This supports its use as a minimally invasive surgical option for this population.
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.