Methods
The Mayo Clinic Institutional Review Board approved this study. All patients
who had a hysterectomy performed at Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, between
November 24, 2015, and December 31, 2017, were eligible for inclusion. Patients who
had their consultation and preoperative listing with a gynecologic surgeon before
November 24, 2015, were excluded, even if their surgery occurred within the time
frame of the prospective algorithm. Patients also were not included if they met any
of the criteria listed in Box 1 , to
exclude patients whose route of hysterectomy had a high probability of being planned
on the basis of other surgical diagnoses. The current study added endometriosis and
transgender patients undergoing gender-confirming surgery as exclusion criteria,
which were not part of the retrospective algorithm ( 9 ). Endometriosis was added after reviewing the retrospective results
and recognizing the therapeutic advantage of evaluating for, and removing,
extrauterine endometriosis disease in affected patients. Transgender patients were
excluded because of the complexity of the clinical scenario and several factors that
would not be accounted for with our algorithm.
The results of our retrospective study ( 9 ) showed substantial deviation from the algorithm when patients had a
history of laparotomy. To improve the algorithm and allow its application in a
prospective setting, a decision-tree branch was added to allow for a pelvic
examination under anesthesia at the time of hysterectomy in patients with a history
of laparotomy. An examination under anesthesia allowed the surgeon to evaluate the
feasibility of a vaginal approach while the patient was fully relaxed (allowing
observation of maximum uterine descent and vaginal caliber). The prospective
algorithm was therefore designed to determine the optimal route of hysterectomy for
benign indications according to a patient’s surgical history of laparotomy,
uterine size, and vaginal access as decision-tree branches ( Figure 1 ).
We developed the prospective algorithm and introduced it to our division of
gynecologic surgery in August 2015 before it was implemented in November 2015. With
the assistance of our institution’s radiology department, 3-dimensional
pelvic models were created with variously sized interchangeable uteri. Modeled after
computed tomographic images, the uteri represented 3 pathologic uterine weights from
the retrospective cohort: 100 g, 280 g (12 weeks of gestation), and 500 g ( 10 ). These pelvic and uterine models were
introduced at the division meetings and displayed in outpatient offices for
reference during consultations to help accurately assess uterine weight on bimanual
examination ( Figure 2 ) ( 11 ). Surgeons followed a strict physical examination
template to standardize documentation of the pelvic examination in the office and
under anesthesia to reliably assign an expected hysterectomy route. The examination
findings were uterine size (estimation of gestational weeks comparison), uterine
mobility (mobile or not mobile), uterine location (high in pelvis or not high), and
vaginal caliber (narrow or normal). The prospective decision-tree algorithm and
study exclusion criteria were posted in the outpatient offices and operating rooms
for reference.
An institutional surgical database was used to identify hysterectomies
performed for benign indications, and data were collected on a rolling basis.
Abstracted data included patient demographics; medical, obstetric, and surgical
history; laboratory and pathologic results; clinically relevant intraoperative and
postoperative events (including route conversion and Accordion grading for
postoperative events within 6 weeks) ( 12 );
complications; and hospital readmissions.
The expected surgical route for each patient was determined by using the
prospective algorithm. If a patient underwent an examination under anesthesia, the
expected surgical route was determined based on that path in the algorithm (pathway
2, Figure 1 ), in which the decision-tree branch
of examination under anesthesia–TVH versus examination under
anesthesia–robotic-assisted total laparoscopic hysterectomy is determined
from the examination in the operating room. If clinical examination findings were
not complete in the operative report dictation, no contraindications to TVH were
presumed. If the actual hysterectomy route was less invasive than the route expected
from the algorithm, the case was not considered a deviation. This was supported by
the results of our retrospective cohort study, which showed similar or improved
outcomes when a TVH was performed in patients expected to have robotic-assisted
total laparoscopic hysterectomy ( 9 ), as well
as our study that compared TVH and robotic-assisted total laparoscopic hysterectomy
for perceived contraindications to TVH, which included uterine size and history of
laparotomy ( 13 ).
The results from the prospective use of the decision-tree algorithm are
summarized descriptively: mean (SD) or median (interquartile range [IQR]) for
continuous data and frequency (percentage) for categorical data. The previously
published results from our group’s retrospective algorithm applied to
2009–2013 institutional data ( 9 ) were
compared with the prospective use of the algorithm to evaluate its effect on the
rate of deviation from the algorithm.
Results
During the prospective study period, 365 hysterectomies performed at our
institution met inclusion criteria. Of these, 202 patients (55.3%) met criteria for
a TVH (pathway 1, Figure 1 ) and 57 (15.6%) were
assigned to have an examination under anesthesia and then a TVH (examination under
anesthesia–TVH) (pathways 2 and 4, Figure
1 ) according to the algorithm. Thus, combining the TVH and examination
under anesthesia-TVH groups (pathways 1 and 4, Figure
1 ), 259 hysterectomies (71.0%) were expected to be performed through the
vaginal route. Another 52 women (14.2%) were expected to undergo an examination
under anesthesia followed by a robotic or laparoscopic approach (examination under
anesthesia–robotic-assisted total laparoscopic hysterectomy; pathways 2 and
5, Figure 1 ), and 54 (14.8%) were expected to
have an a priori abdominal, robotic, or laparoscopic hysterectomy (pathway 3, Figure 1 ).
The procedures for 46 patients (12.6%) deviated from the algorithm to a more
invasive route (44 were robotic when vaginal was expected and 2 were abdominal when
vaginal was expected) ( Table 1 ). Seven
patients (1.9%) underwent TVH when a laparoscopic, robotic, or abdominal
hysterectomy was expected (less invasive than the algorithm expected), which was not
considered a deviation from the algorithm.
Among the 259 patients expected to have TVH or examination under
anesthesia–TVH, the surgical indications included precancerous conditions or
early (stage IA1) cervical cancer (30 patients, 11.6%), leiomyomas, abnormal uterine
bleeding, or postmenopausal bleeding (216 patients, 83.4%), dysmenorrhea or painful
menstrual cycles (68 patients, 26.3%), and other indications (28 patients, 10.8%);
78 patients (30.1%) had multiple indications for hysterectomy.
Of the 202 hysterectomies that were expected to be performed as TVH per the
algorithm, 170 (84.2%) were performed vaginally, in accordance with the algorithm
( Table 1 ). These 170 patients had a mean
age of 44.5 years and mean body mass index of 28.3 kg/m 2 ( Table 2 ). Twenty-two patients (12.9%) were nulliparous,
32 of 168 (19.0%) had a vaginal parity of 0, and 22 of 168 (13.1%) had a history of
cesarean delivery. The mean operative time was 95 minutes, which included an apical
suspension. The median uterine pathologic weight was 116 g (IQR, 75–160 g),
and manual uterine debulking techniques were used in 27 patients (15.9%). Three
incidental cystotomies (1.8%) occurred, which were recognized intraoperatively and
repaired. There were no intraoperative route conversions in the TVH group. Nearly
all patients (161, 94.7%) were discharged within 24 hours of surgery.
Within the 6-week postoperative period, 5 patients (2.9%) required a
postoperative blood transfusion due to symptomatic anemia ( Table 2 ). Ten patients (5.9%) had a urinary tract
infection, and 2 patients (1.2%) had an Accordion grade 3 or higher postoperative
complication. Both of these patients required a return to the operating room. One
patient had bleeding from an ovarian vessel, and a pelvic abscess subsequently
developed that required drain placement by interventional radiology and readmission
for intravenous antibiotics. The other patient had acute blood loss anemia, and
diagnostic laparoscopy showed a contained retroperitoneal hematoma. She was also 1
of the 5 who required a postoperative blood transfusion.
Of the 57 hysterectomies that were expected to be performed as examination
under anesthesia–TVH per the algorithm, 41 patients (71.9%) had an
examination under anesthesia followed directly by TVH ( Table 1 ). When these patients were combined with the
expected TVH group, 211 of an expected 259 patients (81.5%) underwent vaginal
hysterectomy. The 41 patients with examination under anesthesia–TVH had a
mean age of 42.7 years and mean body mass index of 31.0 kg/m 2 ( Table 2 ). Two of the 41 patients (4.9%) were
nulliparous, 16 of the other 39 (41.0%) had a vaginal parity of 0, and 19 of 40
patients (47.5%) had a history of cesarean delivery. The mean operative time was 119
minutes, which included an apical suspension. The median uterine pathologic weight
was 185 g (IQR, 110–350 g).
There were 2 intraoperative route conversions (4.9%) to complete the
hysterectomy: the peritoneal cavity could not be entered due to adhesions in 1
patient, and bleeding was addressed in 1 patient, which resulted in an
intraoperative blood transfusion. Almost all patients (95.1%) were discharged within
24 hours of surgery. One patient (2.4%) required a postoperative blood transfusion.
There were no Accordion grade 3 or greater postoperative complications in the
examination under anesthesia-TVH group within 6 weeks of hysterectomy. Among the
combined 211 patients who underwent vaginal hysterectomy, the expected vaginal
hysterectomies were completed successfully in 209 (99.1%).
A total of 46 patients (12.6%) underwent a more invasive route than was
predicted by the algorithm: 32 deviations among 202 hysterectomies expected to be
TVH per the algorithm (15.8%; 95% CI, 10.8%−20.9%), and 14 deviations among
57 hysterectomies expected to be examination under anesthesia-TVH per the algorithm
(24.6%; 95% CI, 13.4%−35.7%) ( Table
1 ). Among these 46 patients, 15 of 46 (33%) were nulliparous, 19 of 44 (43%)
had a vaginal parity of 0, and 11 of 45 (24%) had a history of cesarean delivery
( Table 3 ). The median uterine pathologic
weight was 172 g (IQR, 96–250 g). There were no intraoperative route
conversions. One intraoperative incidental rectotomy occurred during
robotic-assisted total laparoscopic hysterectomy, which was recognized and repaired
at the time of surgery. Most patients (87%) were discharged within 24 hours. Of the
43 patients with follow-up, 1 patient (2%) was readmitted, with return to the
operating room due to a ureteral injury, 1 (2%) had cellulitis at a port site
requiring antibiotic treatment, and 2 (5%) had urinary tract infections.
Among the 7 patients who underwent TVH when a more invasive route was
expected by the algorithm ( Table 1 ), 1 (14%) was nulliparous, 4 of 6 (67%) had a
vaginal parity of 0, and 5 of 6 (83%) had a history of cesarean delivery ( Table 1 ). The mean operative time in these
cases was 137 minutes, which included an apical suspension. The median uterine
pathologic weight was 405 g (IQR, 110–590 g). Manual uterine debulking
techniques were used in 6 patients (86%). There was 1 intraoperative route
conversion (14.3%). There were no intraoperative complications and no Accordion
grade 3 complications. All 7 patients were discharged within 24 hours of
surgery.
In our previously published retrospective algorithm cohorts, 15.1% of
hysterectomies deviated from the algorithm to a more invasive route before the
initiation of robotic surgery at our institution, compared with 25.8% afterward
( 9 ). In the current study, when the
algorithm was implemented prospectively, the deviation from the algorithm to a more
invasive route decreased to 12.6%.
Discussion
The prospective algorithm used in this study is a straightforward,
clinically applicable decision-tree model that can assist in determining the optimal
route of hysterectomy. The results show that the majority of patients are expected
to have a TVH.
This algorithm identified 2 groups of patients undergoing TVH: those deemed
to be candidates a priori for TVH and those requiring initial examination under
anesthesia, effectively distinguishing between more straightforward TVH and cases
that may be more surgically challenging (examination under anesthesia–TVH).
Prospective algorithm use predicts that 55.3% of all hysterectomies were expected to
have an a priori TVH, which is higher than the actual TVH rate of 11.5% reported
previously ( 2 ).
The retrospective algorithm noted a deviation rate of 25.8% when a TVH was
expected ( 9 ). Prospective use of the algorithm
decreased the rate of deviation to 12.6%, which is lower than the baseline 15.1%
before the initiation of robotic surgery ( 9 ).
This further supports the use of the algorithm in combination with educating
gynecologic surgeons about the feasibility of vaginal surgery.
The median pathologic uterine weight was 116 g in the TVH group and 185 g in
the examination under anesthesia–TVH group, which is much less than the 280 g
(12 weeks of gestation) previously suggested as an upper limit for a priori TVH
( 7 , 14 ). Although large uteri are encountered by gynecologic surgeons, the
median uterine weights in the current study are most likely representative of the
vast majority of cases performed at the national level. Complications were low in
our TVH cohort, with no ureteral injuries, which emphasizes the safety of this
surgical approach and should encourage the increased use of vaginal surgery.
Results of this study support that surgeons with advanced vaginal surgery
skillsets may safely perform TVH in patients who would otherwise be expected to
undergo a more invasive route per the algorithm. The subset of these patients in
this study was small (n=7), but they encountered no intraoperative complications and
had excellent outcomes. One patient had an intraoperative route conversion because
the surgery could not be completed vaginally, but this was accomplished without
complication. Skilled vaginal surgeons should continue to provide TVH as a safe and
effective option, even in women for whom the algorithm would predict a more invasive
approach.
Substantial cost implications are associated with the route of hysterectomy.
Woelk et al ( 5 ) reported an unadjusted cost
that was $4,084 lower for vaginal than for robotic hysterectomies. In our cohort of
365 patients, the estimated cost savings would be $657,524 if the TVH rate
(excluding examination under anesthesia-TVH) was 55% compared with 11%. As such,
increasing the rate of vaginal hysterectomy could significantly decrease health care
delivery costs at local and national levels.
Our study has multiple strengths, including its prospective design and
implementation. The education provided to surgeons before initiating the protocol
included education on estimating uterine size using pelvic models for hands-on
practice and review of the algorithm, both of which were helpful. Another strength
was the alteration of the previous retrospective algorithm to include an examination
under anesthesia option. This assisted the surgeon in determining vaginal
accessibility to the uterus if it was unclear during the office examination. The
exclusion criteria were used to create a cohort with clearly benign uterine disease,
which improves generalizability to general gynecologic surgeons.
Study limitations include an expertise bias at our institution, which has a
long-standing history of vaginal surgery. However, even considering the TVH group
alone, without the more complex cases (examination under anesthesia–TVH), the
study supports the use of the vaginal route in routine gynecologic surgery and would
allow more than 50% of these hysterectomies to be vaginal. The small number of
patients with algorithm deviations or poor postoperative outcomes limited the power
needed to perform valid statistical comparisons. Additionally, our study was limited
by the lack of a control group; all patients undergoing hysterectomy at our
institution were included. Further research comparing the use of this model with
standard practice may highlight additional risks and benefits.
Teaching residents-in-training the skillset and specific techniques required
for vaginal hysterectomy is challenging, and the minimum number of cases required to
graduate is only 15 ( 15 ). Additionally, the
Minimally Invasive Gynecology fellowship does not focus on teaching fellows vaginal
surgery, which thereby further decreases the fellowship-trained surgeons who can
offer TVH. Unfortunately, this risks the future of vaginal hysterectomy. Surgeons
who perform vaginal hysterectomies must mentor trainees so vaginal surgery can be
offered as the optimal route of benign hysterectomy when feasible.
In our study, a majority of patients qualified for vaginal hysterectomy (TVH
and examination under anesthesia–TVH), and 99% were successfully completed.
Vaginal surgery is feasible, carries a low complication rate with excellent
outcomes, and should have a place in gynecologic surgery. Prospective use of this
algorithm nationally may increase the rate of TVH and decrease health care delivery
costs.
Introduction
The rate of total vaginal hysterectomy (TVH) among women requiring
hysterectomy decreased in the United States from 21.7% in 2007 to 19.8% in 2010.
Furthermore, between 2010 and 2013, only 11.5% of commercially insured patients
undergoing hysterectomy had TVH ( 1 , 2 ). Robotic-assisted hysterectomy increased from
0.5% to 9.5% from 2007 through 2010 ( 1 ). TVH
is the most cost-effective route, with a low complication rate, and, therefore,
should be performed when feasible ( 3 – 5 ). Algorithms using
factors of vaginal access, uterine size, and concern for extrauterine disease have
been suggested but not widely used, and the hysterectomy route is not standardized
( 6 , 7 ).
TVH has been important historically. At our institution in 1958, over half of
all hysterectomies were TVH ( 8 ). Recognizing
this practice change, our group (J.J.S., J.A.O., J.N.B.-G., S.C.D., J.B.G.) created
a clinical decision-tree algorithm for benign hysterectomies and previously applied
it retrospectively to 2 cohorts: patients treated before (2004–2005) and
after (2009–2013) the advent of robotic surgery (9). If the algorithm
suggested TVH, patients who underwent TVH had better outcomes than those who had
robotic hysterectomy. Initiation of robotic surgery increased algorithm deviations
from 15.1% to 25.8% when TVH was assigned by the algorithm. Additionally, if the
algorithm had been followed, the estimated 5-year savings would have been
approximately $800,000 ( 9 ).
Our primary objective was to evaluate the effect of the algorithm on the rate
of TVH performed. The secondary aims were to evaluate short-term postoperative
outcomes after prospectively implementing a clinical decision-tree algorithm to
determine optimal hysterectomy route and to discuss estimated effects on health care
costs.
Text is read by the "Ask this paper" AI Q&A widget below.
Extraction quality varies by source — PMC NXML preserves structure
cleanly, OA-HTML may include some navigation residue, and OA-PDF can
have broken hyphenation. The publisher copy
(via DOI)
is the canonical version.