Journals / Anatolian Current Medical Journal / 2026 / Volume: 8 Issue: 4

Reaffirming the role of vaginal hysterectomy in the era of minimally invasive surgery: a comparative study of three surgical techniques

İnci Öz(Medicana Ataköy Hastanesi)0000-0001-9160-2733
Ali Utku Öz(Beykoz State Hospital)0009-0000-9908-5187
Pages
—
Publication Date
2026-07-16
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Conclusions: Vaginal hysterectomy remains a valuable, efficient, and safe surgical option in modern practice, supporting individualized surgical planning based on patient characteristics and institutional resources.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Aims: Hysterectomy remains one of the most frequently performed gynecologic procedures.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Methods: This retrospective cohort study was conducted between January 2014 and May 2022 in a tertiary referral center.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Conclusions: Vaginal hysterectomy remains a valuable, efficient, and safe surgical option in modern practice, supporting individualized surgical planning based on patient characteristics and institutional resources.
🔬Design:Review & Systematic Survey
📍Scope:2014 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Hysterectomy · vaginal surgery · laparoscopy

Abstract

Aims: Hysterectomy remains one of the most frequently performed gynecologic procedures. While minimally invasive techniques such as laparoscopy and robotic-assisted surgery have improved precision and visualization, the vaginal approach being the least invasive, most cost-effective, and physiologically natural route-continues to hold clinical importance. This study aimed to reassess the relevance of vaginal hysterectomy compared with laparoscopic and robotic techniques by evaluating surgical, economic, and recovery-related outcomes over a ten-year institutional period. Methods: This retrospective cohort study was conducted between January 2014 and May 2022 in a tertiary referral center. A total of 675 hysterectomy cases were reviewed, and after applying inclusion and exclusion criteria, 487 (72.2%) vaginal, 156 (23.1%) laparoscopic, and 32 (4.7%) robotic procedures were analyzed. Operative time, blood loss, postoperative complications, hospital stay, and healthcare cost were compared across groups using appropriate statistical tests, with significance set at p<0.05. Results: Postoperative complications occurred in 9.1% of patients, most commonly urinary tract infection (1.3%), surgical site infection (1.0%), and adhesions (0.9%). Hysterectomy type showed no significant association with healthcare cost, complication rate, or 30-day readmission. Significant differences were found for operative time, cost, blood loss, and hospital stay (p<0.05). Robotic hysterectomy yielded the lowest blood loss but longer duration and higher cost, whereas vaginal hysterectomy offered superior efficiency and cost-effectiveness without compromising safety. Conclusions: Vaginal hysterectomy remains a valuable, efficient, and safe surgical option in modern practice, supporting individualized surgical planning based on patient characteristics and institutional resources.

🔖

Cite This Article

Öz, İ., Öz, A. U. (2026). Reaffirming the role of vaginal hysterectomy in the era of minimally invasive surgery: a comparative study of three surgical techniques. Anatolian Current Medical Journal, Volume: 8 Issue: 4. https://doi.org/10.38053/acmj.1905930

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (19)

  1. Wenzel HHB, Kruitwagen RFPM, Nijman HW, et al. Short-term surgical complications after radical hysterectomy-a nationwide cohort study. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2020;99(7):925-932. doi:10.1111/aogs.13812
  2. Kaaki B, Lewis E, Takallapally S, Cleveland B. Direct cost of hysterectomy: comparison of robotic versus other routes. J Robot Surg. 2020;14(2):305-310. doi:10.1007/s11701-019-00982-7
  3. SSutton CJG. The History of hysterectomy. in Hysterectomy: A Comprehensive Surgical Approach. eds. Alkatout I, Mettler L. Springer International Publishing, Cham, 2018. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-22497-8_1.
  4. Gorina Y, Xu J, Arias E. Hysterectomy among women age 18 and older. NCHS Data Brief. 2024;(494):1-8. doi:10.15620/cdc:145592
  5. Li Y, Song W, Gao P, et al. Global, regional, and national burden of breast, cervical, uterine, and ovarian cancer and their risk factors among women from 1990 to 2021, and projections to 2050: findings from the global burden of disease study 2021. BMC Cancer. 2025;25(1):330. doi:10.1186/s12885-025-13741-9
  6. NHS. Hysterectomy. NHS. Published 2017. Accessed June 11, 2026.
  7. Azadi A, Masoud AT, Ulibarri H, et al. Vaginal hysterectomy compared with laparoscopic hysterectomy in benign gynecologic conditions: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Obstet Gynecol. 2023;142(6):1373-1394. doi:10.1097/AOG.0000000000005434
  8. Alshowaikh K, Karpinska-Leydier K, Amirthalingam J, et al. Surgical and patient outcomes of robotic versus conventional laparoscopic hysterectomy: a systematic review. Cureus. 2021;13(8):e16828. doi:10.7759/cureus.16828
  9. Vargas Maldonado D, Yi J, Trabuco E. Route of hysterectomy: vaginal. J Gynecol Surg. 2021;37(2):101-106. doi:10.1089/gyn.2020.0234
  10. Qadrie Z, Maqbool M, Dar MA, Qadir A. Navigating challenges and maximizing potential: handling complications and constraints in minimally invasive surgery. Open Health. 2025;6(1):20250059. doi:10.1515/ohe-2025-0059
  11. Dikaiou P, Björck L, Adiels M, et al. Obesity, overweight and risk for cardiovascular disease and mortality in young women. Eur J Prev Cardiol. 2021;28(12):1351-1359. doi:10.1177/2047487320908983
  12. Madueke-Laveaux OS, Elsharoud A, Al-Hendy A. What we know about the long-term risks of hysterectomy for benign indication-a systematic review. J Clin Med. 2021;10(22):5335. doi:10.3390/jcm10225335
  13. Lenfant L, Canlorbe G, Belghiti J, et al. Robotic-assisted benign hysterectomy compared with laparoscopic, vaginal, and open surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Robot Surg. 2023;17(6):2647-2662. doi:10.1007/s11701-023-01724-6
  14. Kim TY, Park SH, Sang JH, Choi JI, Chung SH. Comparison of intraoperative and postoperative bleeding risks between robot-assisted and laparoscopic hysterectomy. Clin Exp Obstet Gynecol. 2024;51(5):122. doi:10.31083/j.ceog5105122
  15. Dencker EE, Bonde A, Troelsen A, Varadarajan KM, Sillesen M. Postoperative complications: an observational study of trends in the United States from 2012 to 2018. BMC Surg. 2021;21(1):393. doi:10.1186/s12893-021-01392-z
  16. Luchristt D, Brown O, Kenton K, Bretschneider CE. Trends in operative time and outcomes in minimally invasive hysterectomy from 2008 to 2018. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2021;224(2):202.e1-202.e12. doi:10.1016/j.ajog.2020.08.014
  17. Takmaz Ö, Güngör M. Robotic versus laparoscopic hysterectomy; comparison of early surgical outcomes. J Turk Ger Gynecol Assoc. 2020;21(4): 260-264. doi:10.4274/jtgga.galenos.2020.2019.0187
  18. Ghomi A, Nolan W, Sanderson DJ, Sanderson R, Schwander B, Feldstein J. Robotic hysterectomy compared with laparoscopic hysterectomy: is it still more costly to perform? J Robot Surg. 2022;16(3):537-541. doi:10.1007/s11701-021-01273-w
  19. Martínez-Maestre MÁ, Jódar-Sánchez F, Calderón-Cabrera AM, González-Cejudo C, Silván-Alfaro JM, Melero-Cortés LM. Healthcare and indirect cost of the laparoscopic vs. vaginal approach in benign hysterectomy. JSLS. 2022;26(3):e2022.00048. doi:10.4293/JSLS.2022.00048