-
International Journal of Gynecological... Oct 2016The aim of this study was to compare intraoperative and short-term postoperative outcomes and recurrence of laparoscopically assisted radical vaginal hysterectomy... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVE
The aim of this study was to compare intraoperative and short-term postoperative outcomes and recurrence of laparoscopically assisted radical vaginal hysterectomy (LARVH) to abdominal radical hysterectomy (ARH) in the treatment of early-stage cervical cancer.
METHODS
A search of PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane library search trial (central) databases was conducted from database inception through December 2015. We included studies comparing surgical approaches with radical hysterectomy (LARVH vs ARH) in women with stages IA1 to IIB cervical cancer. Outcomes included blood loss, operative time, number of lymph nodes retrieved, intraoperative complications, hospital stay, and prognosis.
RESULT
Seven studies were included (4 prospective cohort studies and 3 case control studies) enrolling 794 women; 349 women were treated by LARVH, and 445 were treated by ARH. Laparoscopically assisted radical vaginal hysterectomy was associated with less blood loss (weight mean difference [WMD], -237.45; 95% confidence interval [CI], -453.42 to -21.47), wound-related complications (odds ratio, 0.17; 95% CI, 0.05-0.61), shorter hospital stay (WMD, -2.01; 95% CI, -2.52 to -1.51), and longer operative time (WMD, 48.95; 95% CI, 42.08 to 55.82) versus ARH. Laparoscopically assisted radical vaginal hysterectomy was comparable with ARH in number of lymph nodes retrieved, urinary-related complications, rectal injury, lymphedema, and all prognosis indicators.
CONCLUSIONS
The evidence suggests that LARVH is superior to ARH with lower blood loss, less wound-related complications, and shorter hospital stay. Laparoscopically assisted radical vaginal hysterectomy and ARH seem equivalent in number of lymph nodes retrieved, urinary-related complications, rectal injury, lymphedema, and prognosis.
Topics: Databases, Factual; Female; Humans; Hysterectomy, Vaginal; Intraoperative Complications; Laparoscopy; Neoplasm Staging; Postoperative Complications; Uterine Cervical Neoplasms
PubMed: 27400320
DOI: 10.1097/IGC.0000000000000794 -
Obstetrics and Gynecology May 2024To identify the optimal hysterectomy approach for large uteri in gynecologic surgery for benign indications from a perioperative morbidity standpoint.
OBJECTIVE
To identify the optimal hysterectomy approach for large uteri in gynecologic surgery for benign indications from a perioperative morbidity standpoint.
DATA SOURCES
PubMed and Embase databases were searched from inception through September 19, 2022. Meta-analyses were conducted as feasible.
METHODS OF STUDY SELECTION
This review included studies that compared routes of hysterectomy with or without bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy for large uteri (12 weeks or more or 250 g or more) and excluded studies with any concurrent surgery for pelvic organ prolapse, incontinence, gynecologic malignancy, or any obstetric indication for hysterectomy.
TABULATION, INTEGRATION, AND RESULTS
The review included 25 studies comprising nine randomized trials, two prospective, and 14 retrospective nonrandomized comparative studies. Studies were at high risk of bias. There was lower operative time for total vaginal hysterectomy compared with laparoscopically assisted vaginal hysterectomy (LAVH) (mean difference 39 minutes, 95% CI, 18-60) and total vaginal hysterectomy compared with total laparoscopic hysterectomy (mean difference 50 minutes, 95% CI, 29-70). Total laparoscopic hysterectomy was associated with much greater risk of ureteral injury compared with total vaginal hysterectomy (odds ratio 7.54, 95% CI, 2.52-22.58). There were no significant differences in bowel injury rates between groups. There were no differences in length of stay among the laparoscopic approaches. For LAVH compared with total vaginal hysterectomy, randomized controlled trials favored total vaginal hysterectomy for length of stay. When rates of blood transfusion were compared between these abdominal hysterectomy and robotic-assisted total hysterectomy routes, abdominal hysterectomy was associated with a sixfold greater risk of transfusion than robotic-assisted total hysterectomy (6.31, 95% CI, 1.07-37.32). Similarly, single studies comparing robotic-assisted total hysterectomy with LAVH, total laparoscopic hysterectomy, or total vaginal hysterectomy all favored robotic-assisted total hysterectomy for reduced blood loss.
CONCLUSION
Minimally invasive routes are safe and effective and have few complications. Minimally invasive approach (vaginal, laparoscopic, or robotic) results in lower blood loss and shorter length of stay, whereas the abdominal route has a shorter operative time.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION
PROSPERO, CRD42021233300.
PubMed: 38743951
DOI: 10.1097/AOG.0000000000005607 -
International Urogynecology Journal Nov 2017The efficacy and safety of removing or preserving the uterus during reconstructive pelvic surgery is a matter of debate. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS
The efficacy and safety of removing or preserving the uterus during reconstructive pelvic surgery is a matter of debate.
METHODS
We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies that compared hysteropreservation and hysterectomy in the management of uterine prolapse. PubMed, Medline, SciELO and LILACS databases were searched from inception until January 2017. We selected only randomized controlled trials and observational cohort prospective comparative studies. Primary outcomes were recurrence and reoperation rates. Secondary outcomes were: operative time, blood loss, visceral injury, voiding dysfunction, duration of catheterization, length of hospital stay, mesh exposure, dyspareunia, malignant neoplasia and quality of life.
RESULTS
Eleven studies (six randomized and five non-randomized) were included involving 910 patients (462 in the hysteropreservation group and 448 in the hysterectomy group). Pooled data including all surgical techniques showed no difference between the groups regarding recurrence of uterine prolapse (RR 1.65, 95% CI 0.88-3.10; p = 0.12), but the risk of recurrence following hysterectomy was lower when the vaginal route was used with native tissue repair (RR 10.61; 95% CI 1.26-88.94; p = 0.03). Hysterectomy was associated with a lower reoperation rate for any prolapse compartment than hysteropreservation (RR 2.05; 95% CI 1.13-3.74; p = 0.02). Hysteropreservation was associated with a shorter operative time (mean difference -12.43 min; 95% CI -14.11 to -10.74 ; p < 0.00001) and less blood loss (mean difference -60.42 ml; 95% CI -71.31 to -49.53 ml; p < 0.00001). Other variables were similar between the groups.
CONCLUSIONS
Overall, the rate of recurrence of uterine prolapse was not lower but the rate of reoperation for prolapse was lower following hysterectomy, while operative time was shorter and blood loss was less with hysteropreservation. The limitations of this analysis were the inclusion of nonrandomized studies and the variety of surgical techniques. The results should be interpreted with caution due to potential biases.
Topics: Female; Humans; Hysterectomy; Organ Sparing Treatments; Uterine Prolapse
PubMed: 28780651
DOI: 10.1007/s00192-017-3433-1 -
Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics Oct 2015Some studies suggest that also regarding the patient with a body mass index (BMI) ≥35 kg/m(2) the minimally invasive approach to hysterectomy is superior. However,... (Review)
Review
PURPOSE
Some studies suggest that also regarding the patient with a body mass index (BMI) ≥35 kg/m(2) the minimally invasive approach to hysterectomy is superior. However, current practice and research on the preference of gynaecologists still show that the rate of abdominal hysterectomy (AH) increases as the BMI increases. A systematic review with cumulative analysis of comparative studies was performed to evaluate the outcomes of AH, laparoscopic hysterectomy (LH) and vaginal hysterectomy (VH) in very obese and morbidly obese patients (BMI ≥35 kg/m(2)).
METHODS
PubMed and EMBASE were searched for records on AH, LH and VH for benign indications or (early stage) malignancy through October 2014. Included studies were graded on level of evidence. Studies with a comparative design were pooled in a cumulative analysis.
RESULTS
Two randomized controlled trials, seven prospective studies and 14 retrospective studies were included (2232 patients; 1058 AHs, 959 LHs, and 215 VHs). The cumulative analysis identified that, compared to LH, AH was associated with more wound dehiscence [risk ratio (RR) 2.58, 95 % confidence interval (CI) 1.71-3.90; P = 0.000], more wound infection (RR 4.36, 95 % CI 2.79-6.80; P = 0.000), and longer hospital admission (mean difference 2.9 days, 95 % CI 1.96-3.74; P = 0.000). The pooled conversion rate was 10.6 %. Compared to AH, VH was associated with similar advantages as LH.
CONCLUSIONS
Compared to AH, both LH and VH are associated with fewer postoperative complications and shorter length of hospital stay. Therefore, the feasibility of LH and VH should be considered prior the abdominal approach to hysterectomy in very obese and morbidly obese patients.
Topics: Adult; Female; Genital Diseases, Female; Humans; Hysterectomy; Hysterectomy, Vaginal; Laparoscopy; Length of Stay; Middle Aged; Morbidity; Obesity; Obesity, Morbid; Operative Time; Postoperative Complications; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 25773357
DOI: 10.1007/s00404-015-3680-7 -
BMJ (Clinical Research Ed.) Jun 2005To evaluate the most appropriate surgical method of hysterectomy (abdominal, vaginal, or laparoscopic) for women with benign disease. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVE
To evaluate the most appropriate surgical method of hysterectomy (abdominal, vaginal, or laparoscopic) for women with benign disease.
DESIGN
Systematic review and meta-analysis.
DATA SOURCES
Cochrane Menstrual Disorders and Subfertility Group Trials Register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Medline, Embase, and Biological Abstracts.
SELECTION OF STUDIES
Only randomised controlled trials were selected; participants had to have benign gynaecological disease; interventions had to comprise at least one hysterectomy method compared with another; and trials had to report primary outcomes (time taken to return to normal activities, intraoperative visceral injury, and major long term complications) or secondary outcomes (operating time, other immediate complications of surgery, short term complications, and duration of hospital stay).
RESULTS
27 trials (total of 3643 participants) were included. Return to normal activities was quicker after vaginal than after abdominal hysterectomy (weighted mean difference 9.5 (95% confidence interval 6.4 to 12.6) days) and after laparoscopic than after abdominal hysterectomy (difference 13.6 (11.8 to 15.4) days), but was not significantly different for laparoscopic versus vaginal hysterectomy (difference -1.1 (-4.2 to 2.1) days). There were more urinary tract injuries with laparoscopic than with abdominal hysterectomy (odds ratio 2.61 (95% confidence interval 1.22 to 5.60)), but no other intraoperative visceral injuries showed a significant difference between surgical approaches. Data were notably absent for many important long term patient outcome measures, where the analyses were underpowered to detect important differences, or they were simply not reported in trials.
CONCLUSIONS
Significantly speedier return to normal activities and other improved secondary outcomes (shorter duration of hospital stay and fewer unspecified infections or febrile episodes) suggest that vaginal hysterectomy is preferable to abdominal hysterectomy where possible. Where vaginal hysterectomy is not possible, laparoscopic hysterectomy is preferable to abdominal hysterectomy, although it brings a higher chance of bladder or ureter injury.
Topics: Female; Humans; Hysterectomy; Intraoperative Complications; Laparoscopy; Length of Stay; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Treatment Outcome; Urinary Tract
PubMed: 15976422
DOI: 10.1136/bmj.330.7506.1478 -
BJOG : An International Journal of... Dec 2006Vaginal vault smears are used to detect persisting neoplasia of the lower genital tract after hysterectomy. Recent data suggest both widespread use and uncertain... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Vaginal vault smears are used to detect persisting neoplasia of the lower genital tract after hysterectomy. Recent data suggest both widespread use and uncertain evidence of their effectiveness.
OBJECTIVES
To identify and synthesise evidence on the use and effectiveness of vaginal vault smears and to assess the quality. SEARCH STRATEGY 'vault smear' OR 'vaginal vault smear' OR 'cervical vault smear' OR ('Hysterectomy') AND ('Follow up' OR 'Smear'). SELECTION CRITERIA Primary research, women who had a hysterectomy and were followed up by vault cytology.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Systematic search (eight electronic databases), supplemented by contact with experts and review of bibliographies. Two independent reviewers determined eligibility/validity and extracted data concerning test performance characteristics. Quality was assessed according to the established criteria.
RESULTS
Of 441 unique references, only 19 were suitable. Quality of studies varied considerably and few were of 'high' methodological quality. Studies were geographically diverse, and were published over more than 40 years in 16 journals. From the higher scoring papers, there were 11 659 hysterectomies [6546, benign; 76, cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) I/CIN II; 5037, CIN III]. Proportions of abnormal vault smears and abnormal biopsies during follow up increased with worsening histology at hysterectomy (P < 0.0001 and P = 0.0001). There was only one report of vaginal cancer subsequent to hysterectomy for CIN and insufficient data to allow for reliable meta-analysis.
CONCLUSIONS
Vault smears cause anxiety, consume resources and their value is largely unproven. Inconsistency of study design and limited methodological quality means that the value of vault smears could not be established. High-quality research is required to ensure that the guidelines are evidence based.
Topics: Female; Humans; Hysterectomy; Postoperative Care; Precancerous Conditions; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Uterine Cervical Diseases; Uterine Cervical Neoplasms; Vaginal Smears; Uterine Cervical Dysplasia
PubMed: 17081187
DOI: 10.1111/j.1471-0528.2006.01099.x -
Journal of Minimally Invasive Gynecology Mar 2022Minimizing intraoperative blood loss during hysterectomy is crucial to lessen associated perioperative morbidity. The aim of this investigation is to conduct a... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVE
Minimizing intraoperative blood loss during hysterectomy is crucial to lessen associated perioperative morbidity. The aim of this investigation is to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared vasopressin versus normal saline in controlling intraoperative blood loss during hysterectomy.
DATA SOURCES
We screened 5 major databases (PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials) from inception till July 18, 2021. We used the following query search in all databases: (vasopressin OR arginine vasopressin OR argipressin OR antidiuretic hormone) AND (hysterectomy) AND (saline OR placebo OR control OR no treatment) AND (randomized OR randomised OR randomly). There was no language restriction during database screening.
METHODS OF STUDY SELECTION
We considered all studies that met the following evidence-based criteria: (1) patients: individuals undergoing hysterectomy for any indication, (2) intervention: vasopressin, (3) comparator: normal saline, placebo, or no treatment, (4) outcomes: reliable extraction of any of our endpoints, and (5) study design: RCTs. We assessed risk of bias of included studies and pooled endpoints as mean difference (MD) or risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence interval (CI). We performed statistical analysis using the Review Manager software, version 5.4.0.
TABULATION, INTEGRATION, AND RESULTS
Seven RCTs with an overall low risk of bias met the inclusion criteria. This meta-analysis included a total of 455 patients; 232 and 223 patients were allocated to vasopressin and control group, respectively. The majority of RCTs were vaginal hysterectomy (n = 5), few abdominal hysterectomy, (n = 2) and no laparoscopic hysterectomy. The mean estimated intraoperative blood loss was significantly lower in favor of the vasopressin group compared with the control group (n = 6 RCTs, MD = -119.85 mL, 95% CI [-177.55, -62.14], p <.001). However, there was no significant difference between both groups regarding mean operating time, mean change in postoperative hemoglobin, mean hospital stay, rate of febrile morbidity, rate of pelvic infection, rate of perioperative blood transfusion, and rate of perioperative complications.
CONCLUSION
Compared with normal saline, vasopressin significantly reduced the estimated blood loss during hysterectomy but did not change any clinically significant outcomes. In addition, vasopressin was safe and did not correlate with an increase in the rates of febrile morbidity or pelvic infection.
Topics: Blood Loss, Surgical; Female; Humans; Hysterectomy; Hysterectomy, Vaginal; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Vasopressins
PubMed: 34648933
DOI: 10.1016/j.jmig.2021.10.003 -
Frontiers in Oncology 2024Primary vaginal cancer is a rare condition. Some studies have revealed an increased risk of vaginal cancer among patients who have undergone hysterectomy for... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Primary vaginal cancer is a rare condition. Some studies have revealed an increased risk of vaginal cancer among patients who have undergone hysterectomy for premalignant and malignant cervical disease. However, there is limited literature available on primary vaginal cancer following hysterectomy for benign conditions.
OBJECTIVES
This review aimed to investigate available evidence on clinical characteristics, treatments, and outcomes of primary vaginal cancer following hysterectomy for benign diseases. Additionally, we provide a case of a patient who developed primary vaginal cancer 10 years after undergoing hysterectomy for abnormal uterine bleeding.
SEARCH STRATEGY
We conducted a comprehensive literature search on PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science using a combination of title and abstract represented by "hysterectomy", and "vaginal cancer"; "vaginal neoplasm"; and "cancer of vagina". No article type restrictions were applied.
MAIN RESULTS
Eight studies with a total of 56 cases were included in this review. The main symptom observed was vaginal bleeding. Squamous cancer was found to be the most common type, followed by adenocarcinoma. The majority of vaginal cancer cases occurred approximately 10 years after undergoing hysterectomy. The most common location of the tumor was in the vaginal apex. The management approaches varied and details were available in 25 cases. Among these, 7 cases were treated with radiotherapy alone, 1 case received concurrent chemoradiation therapy, and the of rest of the cases underwent surgery as the primary treatment, with or without additional adjuvant therapy. Data of follow-up was available for 15 cases, with 2 cases resulting in death and 2 cases experiencing recurrence. The other cases were alive and well at the time of considered follow up.
CONCLUSION
Primary vaginal cancer after hysterectomy for benign conditions is an extremely rare condition. It is essential to have high-level evidence to guide the screening and treatment strategy for this rare condition. A part of women who have undergone hysterectomy for benign disorders can benefit from vaginal cytology evaluation. It is reasonable to postpone the initial screening after surgery and to extend the interval between subsequent screenings. Further retrospective case-control trials are expected to determine which specific subgroups of patients mentioned above might most potentially benefit from screening. The treatment decision for vaginal cancer after hysterectomy is more favorable to radiotherapy-based management rather than surgery. Vaginal endometrioid adenocarcinoma may arise from the malignant transformation of endometriosis. More studies are expected to investigate the correlation between these two diseases.
PubMed: 38347832
DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2024.1334778 -
Health Technology Assessment... Apr 2011The aim of this project was to determine the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of hysterectomy, first- and second-generation endometrial ablation (EA), and... (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
The aim of this project was to determine the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of hysterectomy, first- and second-generation endometrial ablation (EA), and Mirena® (Bayer Healthcare Pharmaceuticals, Pittsburgh, PA, USA) for the treatment of heavy menstrual bleeding.
DESIGN
Individual patient data (IPD) meta-analysis of existing randomised controlled trials to determine the short- to medium-term effects of hysterectomy, EA and Mirena. A population-based retrospective cohort study based on record linkage to investigate the long-term effects of ablative techniques and hysterectomy in terms of failure rates and complications. Cost-effectiveness analysis of hysterectomy versus first- and second-generation ablative techniques and Mirena.
SETTING
Data from women treated for heavy menstrual bleeding were obtained from national and international trials. Scottish national data were obtained from the Scottish Information Services Division.
PARTICIPANTS
Women who were undergoing treatment for heavy menstrual bleeding were included.
INTERVENTIONS
Hysterectomy, first- and second-generation EA, and Mirena.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES
Satisfaction, recurrence of symptoms, further surgery and costs.
RESULTS
Data from randomised trials indicated that at 12 months more women were dissatisfied with first-generation EA than hysterectomy [odds ratio (OR): 2.46, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.54 to 3.93; p = 0.0002), but hospital stay [WMD (weighted mean difference) 3.0 days, 95% CI 2.9 to 3.1 days; p < 0.00001] and time to resumption of normal activities (WMD 5.2 days, 95% CI 4.7 to 5.7 days; p < 0.00001) were longer for hysterectomy. Unsatisfactory outcomes associated with first- and second-generation techniques were comparable [12.2% (123/1006) vs 10.6% (110/1034); OR 1.20, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.62; p = 0.2). Rates of dissatisfaction with Mirena and second-generation EA were similar [18.1% (17/94) vs 22.5% (23/102); OR 0.76, 95% CI 0.38 to 1.53; p = 0.4]. Indirect estimates suggested that hysterectomy was also preferable to second-generation EA (OR 2.32, 95% CI 1.27 to 4.24; p = 0.006) in terms of patient dissatisfaction. The evidence to suggest that hysterectomy is preferable to Mirena was weaker (OR 2.22, 95% CI 0.94 to 5.29; p = 0.07). In women treated by EA or hysterectomy and followed up for a median [interquartile range (IQR)] duration of 6.2 (2.7-10.8) and 11.6 (7.9-14.8) years, respectively, 962/11,299 (8.5%) women originally treated by EA underwent further gynaecological surgery. While the risk of adnexal surgery was similar in both groups [adjusted hazards ratio 0.80 (95% CI 0.56 to 1.15)], women who had undergone ablation were less likely to need pelvic floor repair [adjusted hazards ratio 0.62 (95% CI 0.50 to 0.77)] and tension-free vaginal tape surgery for stress urinary incontinence [adjusted hazards ratio 0.55 (95% CI 0.41 to 0.74)]. Abdominal hysterectomy led to a lower chance of pelvic floor repair surgery [hazards ratio 0.54 (95% CI 0.45 to 0.64)] than vaginal hysterectomy. The incidence of endometrial cancer following EA was 0.02%. Hysterectomy was the most cost-effective treatment. It dominated first-generation EA and, although more expensive, produced more quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) than second-generation EA and Mirena. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios for hysterectomy compared with Mirena and hysterectomy compared with second-generation ablation were £1440 per additional QALY and £970 per additional QALY, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS
Despite longer hospital stay and time to resumption of normal activities, more women were satisfied after hysterectomy than after EA. The few data available suggest that Mirena is potentially cheaper and more effective than first-generation ablation techniques, with rates of satisfaction that are similar to second-generation techniques. Owing to a paucity of trials, there is limited evidence to suggest that hysterectomy is preferable to Mirena. The risk of pelvic floor surgery is higher in women treated by hysterectomy than by ablation. Although the most cost-effective strategy, hysterectomy may not be considered an initial option owing to its invasive nature and higher risk of complications. Future research should focus on evaluation of the clinical effectivesness and cost-effectiveness of the best second-generation EA technique under local anaesthetic versus Mirena and types of hysterectomy such as laparoscopic supracervical hysterectomy versus conventional hysterectomy and second-generation EA.
FUNDING
The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.
Topics: Contraceptive Agents, Female; Cost-Benefit Analysis; Endometrial Ablation Techniques; Female; Humans; Hysterectomy; Levonorgestrel; Menorrhagia; Patient Satisfaction; Postoperative Complications; Quality-Adjusted Life Years; Time; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 21535970
DOI: 10.3310/hta15190 -
Einstein (Sao Paulo, Brazil) May 2019To evaluate the best surgical approach for the female urinary incontinence.
OBJECTIVE
To evaluate the best surgical approach for the female urinary incontinence.
METHODS
Systematic review conducted in MEDLINE® Cochrane, EMBASE and LILACS database up to September 1st, 2017. Articles were selected according to study type, type of intervention and outcomes. Articles were selected by more than one researcher based on title, abstract and full text. The SIGN checklist was used for bias assessment.
RESULTS
A total of 165 articles were retrieved from MEDLINE® . Twenty-five studies were elected for full text reading, and 11 of them were selected for the final text analysis. The heterogeneity between questionnaires used in different studies precluded a meta-analysis of results.
CONCLUSION
This study yielded evidences supporting the hypothesis that total and subtotal hysterectomy have different impacts on urinary function of patients with benign uterine diseases. Articles revealed higher frequency of urinary incontinence following subtotal compared to total hysterectomy.
Topics: Female; Humans; Hysterectomy; Hysterectomy, Vaginal; Postoperative Complications; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Surveys and Questionnaires; Time Factors; Urinary Incontinence; Uterine Diseases
PubMed: 31066798
DOI: 10.31744/einstein_journal/2019RW4320