Vaginal Hysterectomy: A Network Meta-Analysis Comparing Short-Term Outcomes of Surgical Techniques and Devices

Giulia Bonavina, Gianluca Bonitta, Andrea Busnelli, Emanuele Rausa, Paolo Ivo Cavoretto, Stefano Salvatore, Massimo Candiani, Alessandro Bulfoni
Journal of Minimally Invasive Gynecology · 2024 · vol. 31(10) , pp. 825–835 · doi:10.1016/j.jmig.2024.07.013 · PMID:39038513 · W4400849998
Systematic review / meta-analysis OA: closed CC0
View on OpenAlex View on PubMed View at publisher
⚙ AI-generated summary by gemini-2.5-flash-lite, 2026-06-10 ⓘ

This network meta-analysis compared short-term outcomes for different surgical techniques and devices used during vaginal hysterectomy.

One-sentence paraphrase of the abstract; not a substitute for reading it. No clinical advice. How this works

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To provide available evidence comparing surgical outcomes of different vaginal hysterectomy (VH) techniques and devices. DATA SOURCES: PubMed, Embase, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases were searched from inception to December 1, 2023, using relevant keywords. METHODS OF STUDY SELECTION: Studies comparing at least 2 surgical techniques and devices for VH were included. An arm-based random effect frequentist network meta-analysis was performed. All available surgical outcomes were evaluated. TABULATION, INTEGRATION, AND RESULTS: Ten randomized controlled trials and 7 observational studies were eligible reporting on 1577 women undergoing VH with different techniques and devices (50% conventional, 22.5% Ligasure, 17.3% BiClamp, and 9.2% transvaginal natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery [vNOTES]). All surgical techniques/devices had a comparable risk ratio (RR) in terms of intraoperative complications, but Clavien-Dindo grade III postoperative complications were significantly reduced in the vNOTES group (RR, 0.15; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.03-0.82; I2 = 0%) compared with conventional VH. The pooled network analysis showed a lower standard mean deviation for blood loss when comparing energy-based vessel sealing technologies (Ligasure: standard mean deviation, -0.92; 95% CI, -1.47 to -0.37; BiClamp: standard mean deviation, -1.66; 95% CI, -2.77 to -0.55) with conventional VH. Total operative time, postoperative hemoglobin variation, and pain were significantly reduced only in the Ligasure group compared with conventional VH. Bilateral salpingectomy or bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy was most commonly performed in the vNOTES group (RR, 1.9; 95% CI, 1.17-3.10) compared with the conventional VH group. CONCLUSION: Modern surgical techniques/devices have the potential to improve anatomic exposure and to reduce morbidity of VH. This may drive resurgence of vaginal approach to hysterectomy.

My notes (saved in your browser only)

MeSH descriptors

Hysterectomy, Vaginal Hysterectomy, Vaginal Natural Orifice Endoscopic Surgery Natural Orifice Endoscopic Surgery Blood Loss, Surgical Female Humans Operative Time Postoperative Complications Postoperative Complications Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic Treatment Outcome

Citation neighborhood (sparse)

Too few in-corpus citations on either side for a chart; here are the lists.

Cites (1)

References (43)

Source provenance

openalex
last seen: 2026-05-14T06:53:02.049147+00:00
pubmed
last seen: 2026-10-08T21:45:04.264734+00:00
unpaywall
last seen: 2026-10-13T06:25:51.201866+00:00
License: CC0 · commercial use OK