A comparison of long-term outcome between Manchester Fothergill and vaginal hysterectomy as treatment for uterine descent

Thys, S.D.; Coolen, Anne Lotte W.M.; Martens, Ingrid R.; Oosterbaan, Herman P.; Roovers, Jan Paul; Mol, Ben Willem J.; Bongers, Marlies Y.

doi:10.1007/s00192-011-1422-3

Cited by 39 publications

(43 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…There was no difference in patient-reported symptom relief and satisfaction 1 year after surgery, but the rate of severe complications was significantly lower in the cervical amputation group. The findings corroborate those of previous studies comparing these two techniques [8, 13, 14]. In the subgroup of patients where no concomitant anterior colporrhaphy was performed, the cervical amputation group had a significantly lower symptomatic recurrence rate 1 year after surgery than the vaginal hysterectomy group, indicating that cervical amputation may be superior to vaginal hysterectomy in the treatment of apical descent.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 88%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Cervical amputation versus vaginal hysterectomy: a population-based register study

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction and hypothesisSurgical management of uterine prolapse varies greatly and recently uterus-preserving techniques have been gaining popularity. The aim of this study was to compare patient-reported outcomes after cervical amputation versus vaginal hysterectomy, with or without concomitant anterior colporrhaphy, in women suffering from pelvic organ prolapse.MethodWe carried out a population-based longitudinal cohort study with data from the Swedish National Quality Register for Gynecological Surgery. Between 2006 and 2013, a total of 3,174 patients with uterine prolapse were identified, who had undergone primary surgery with either cervical amputation or vaginal hysterectomy, with or without concomitant anterior colporrhaphy. Pre- and postoperative prolapse-related symptoms and patient satisfaction were assessed, in addition to complications and adverse events. Between-group comparisons were performed using univariate and multivariate logistic regression.ResultsThere were no differences between the two groups in neither symptom relief nor patient satisfaction. In both groups a total of 81 % of the women reported the absence of vaginal bulging 1 year after surgery and a total of 89 % were satisfied with the result of the operation. The vaginal hysterectomy group had a higher rate of severe complications than the cervical amputation group, 1.9 % vs 0.2 % (p < 0.001). The vaginal hysterectomy group also had a longer duration of surgery and greater perioperative blood loss, in addition to longer hospitalization.ConclusionsCervical amputation seems to perform equally well in comparison to vaginal hysterectomy in the treatment of uterine prolapse, but with less morbidity and a lower rate of severe complications.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 88%

“…In some papers cervical amputation is even described as an obsolete procedure [12]. However, based on the current literature, procedures including amputation of the cervix appear to be equally as effective with regard to anatomical cure and recurrence rates, but with less morbidity than vaginal hysterectomy [8, 13–15]. …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cervical amputation versus vaginal hysterectomy: a population-based register study

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Personal interviews can be an alternative to questionnaires where women with possible complications can relate to their sexual functioning and receive medical advice or be referred to other professionals. Thys et al [16] suggested recently that the emotional, cultural and personal wishes of the women are need to be considered as part of the medical decision for the type of the surgery. The preservation of the uterus, is considered by many women as important to their female identity [13].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Nevertheless, up until now, the typical conservative uterovaginal prolapse surgery is hysterectomy, in spite of common complications such as excessive blood loss, long post operational recovery, middle compartment recurrence, and impairment of bladder function [12,[14][15][16]. One recent research study showed signiWcantly less blood loss and shorter operation time in the Manchester procedure group but higher rate of incomplete emptying of the bladder compared to the vaginal hysterectomy group [16].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 96%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Women’s well-being after Manchester procedure for pelvic reconstruction with uterine preservation: a follow-up study

Liebergall-Wischnitzer

Ben‐Meir

Sarid

et al. 2011

Arch Gynecol Obstet

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Clinician perspectives on hysterectomy versus uterine preservation in pelvic organ prolapse surgery: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

Porcari,

Zorzato,

Bosco

et al. 2024

Intl J Gynecology & Obste

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundPrevious reviews on hysterectomy versus uterine‐sparing surgery in pelvic organ prolapse (POP) repair did not consider that the open abdominal approach or transvaginal mesh use have been largely abandoned.ObjectivesTo provide up‐to‐date evidence by examining only studies investigating techniques currently in use for POP repair.Search StrategyMEDLINE and Embase databases were searched from inception to January 2023.Selection CriteriaWe included randomized and non‐randomized studies comparing surgical procedures for POP with or without concomitant hysterectomy. Studies describing open abdominal approaches or transvaginal mesh implantation were excluded.Data Collection and AnalysisA random effect meta‐analysis was conducted on extracted data reporting pooled mean differences and odds ratios (OR) between groups with 95% confidence intervals (CI).Main ResultsThirty‐eight studies were included. Hysterectomy and uterine‐sparing procedures did not differ in reoperation rate (OR 0.93; 95% CI 0.74–1.17), intraoperative major (OR 1.34; 95% CI 0.79–2.26) and minor (OR 1.38; 95% CI 0.79–2.4) complications, postoperative major (OR 1.42; 95% CI 0.85–2.37) and minor (OR 1.18; 95% CI 0.9–1.53) complications, and objective (OR 1.38; 95% CI 0.92–2.07) or subjective (OR 1.23; 95% CI 0.8–1.88) success. Uterine preservation was associated with a shorter operative time (−22.7 min; 95% CI –16.92 to −28.51 min), shorter hospital stay (−0.35 days, 95% CI –0.04 to −0.65 days), and less blood loss (−61.7 mL; 95% CI –31.3 to −92.1 mL). When only studies using a laparoscopic approach for both arms were considered, no differences were observed in investigated outcomes between the two groups.ConclusionsNo major differences were observed in POP outcomes between procedures with and without concomitant hysterectomy. The decision to preserve or remove the uterus should be tailored on individual factors.

show abstract

A comparison of long-term outcome between Manchester Fothergill and vaginal hysterectomy as treatment for uterine descent

Abstract: The MF procedure is equally effective to the VH and should be considered as a surgical option that allows preservation of the uterus.

Cited by 39 publications

References 15 publications

Cervical amputation versus vaginal hysterectomy: a population-based register study

Cervical amputation versus vaginal hysterectomy: a population-based register study

Women’s well-being after Manchester procedure for pelvic reconstruction with uterine preservation: a follow-up study

Clinician perspectives on hysterectomy versus uterine preservation in pelvic organ prolapse surgery: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About