Background There are various surgical approaches of hysterectomy for benign indications. This study aimed to compare vaginal hysterectomy (VH) and laparoscopic hysterectomy (LH) with respect to their complications and operative outcomes. Methods We selected randomised controlled trials that compared VH with LH for benign gynaecological indications. We included studies published after January 2000 in the following databases: Medline, EMBASE, and CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library). The primary outcome was comparison of the complication rate. The secondary outcomes were comparisons of operating time, blood loss, intraoperative conversion, postoperative pain, length of hospital stay and duration of recuperation. We used Review Manager 5.3 software to perform the meta-analysis. Results Eighteen studies of 1618 patients met the inclusion criteria. The meta-analysis showed no differences in overall complications, intraoperative conversion, postoperative pain on the day of surgery and at 48 h, length of hospital stay and recuperation time between VH and LH. VH was associated with a shorter operating time and lower postoperative pain at 24 h than LH. Conclusions When both surgical approaches are feasible, VH should remain the surgery of choice for benign hysterectomy. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1186/s12905-019-0784-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

The aim of the present study was to compare the oncological outcome of nerve-sparing radical hysterectomy (NSRH) and conventional radical hysterectomy (CRH) for early-stage cervical cancer using a meta-analysis. A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted, including 4 randomized controlled trials (RCT), 8 case-control and 11 comparative cohort studies comparing the morbidity, pelvic dysfunctions and oncological outcome between the two surgical methods. A total of 23 studies were included in this meta-analysis. The studies reported data of patients affected by cervical cancer; were written in English; included ≥20 patients; and reported data of patients with a comparison of clinical outcomes between NSRH and CRH. Data were extracted and risk of bias was assessed by four independent reviewers. A total of 1,796 patients were included: 884 patients (49.2%) undergoing NSRH and 912 (50.8%) undergoing CRH. The meta-analyses were conducted using Review Manager version 5.3 software, which is designed for conducting Cochrane reviews. As regards perioperative parameters, NSRH was found to be associated with a lower intraoperative blood loss and a shorter length of hospital stay in comparison with CRH. Patients undergoing NSRH experienced lower incidence of urinary, colorectal and sexual dysfunction compared with patients undergoing CRH. However, the resected parametrial width was favorable in patients with CRH, suggesting that NSRH was inferior to CRH in terms of radicality. The 5-year disease-free and overall survival rates were similar between the two groups. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, the collected data to date demonstrated that the nerve-sparing approach guarantees minimized surgical-related pelvic dysfunction, with similar oncological outcomes as CRH. However, further RCTs should be conducted to confirm the superiority and safety of NSRH.

Nonpersistent endocrine disrupting chemicals (npEDCs) are exogenous chemicals or mixtures of industrial agents that can interfere with the normal action of hormone with a shorter half-life and lower liposolubility. These are commonly found in plastics, medical equipment, detergents, and cosmetics. Recently, role of npEDCs on the changes of ovary and/or uterus development and alterations in hormonal signaling has been emphasized. However, many controversial results exist on the effects of npEDCs and reproductive health of women. Thus, we have focused to review the scientific evidence of a causal relationship between exposure to npEDCs and representative female reproductive issues such as menstrual cycle, endometriosis, uterine fibroids, polycystic ovarian syndrome and infertility/subfertility. Though not all studies indicated a positive correlation of npEDCs with female reproductive issues, the reviewed data illustrated that the majority of the available data strengthen the evidence of reproductive health-related actions of npEDCs. In future, recommendations should be made in order to reduce human exposure to npEDCs and to protect from steadily increasing reproductive health risks.