Natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery-assisted vaginal hysterectomy versus total laparoscopic hysterectomy: A single-center retrospective study using propensity score analysis
Aranya Yantapant, Nukun Puisungnoen, Marut Yanaranop
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study is to evaluate the safety and efficacy of natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery-assisted vaginal hysterectomy (NOTES-AVH) compared with total laparoscopic hysterectomy (TLH). MATERIALS AND METHODS: The population was a cohort of women who underwent NOTES-AVH and TLH for a nonprolapsed uterus and benign gynecological disease between October 2015 and December 2017 at Rajavithi Hospital, Thailand. Study outcomes included operative time, the requirement of blood transfusion, perioperative complications, and postoperative pain. Factors applied for propensity score matching included age, body mass index, parity, underlying disease, previous abdominal surgery, preoperative diagnosis, presence of endometriosis, and uterine weight. Mean difference (MD) and risk ratio with 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated to represent relative measures of the comparison. RESULTS: Among the 50 pairs, there were no differences in operative time (MD 15.9 min; 95% CI - 9.3-41.1), intraoperative complications (relative risk [RR] 0.33; 95% CI 0.04-3.10) or requirement of blood transfusion (RR 1.50; 95% CI 0.26-8.60) between the NOTES-AVH and TLH groups. NOTES-AVH was associated with lower intensity of postoperative pain (MD - 1.5 at 6-h; 95% CI - 0.8-2.2 and MD - 1.0 at 24-h; 95% CI - 0.4--1.6) and shorter length of stay (MD - 0.3 day; 95% CI - 0.1-0.7 day). CONCLUSION: NOTES-AVH was safe and feasible for an alternative approach for hysterectomy. This technique was superior to TLH in that no abdominal incision was required, and postoperative pain was less intense.