open access

Vol 90, No 12 (2019)
ORIGINAL PAPERS Gynecology
Published online: 2019-12-31
Get Citation

Factors associated with complications of vaginal hysterectomy in patients with pelvic organ prolapse — a single centre’s experience

Nurullah Peker, Edip Aydın, Mustafa Yavuz, Muhammet Hanifi Bademkıran, Serhat Ege, Talip Karaçor, Elif Ağaçayak
DOI: 10.5603/GP.2019.0118
·
Pubmed: 31909461
·
Ginekol Pol 2019;90(12):692-698.

open access

Vol 90, No 12 (2019)
ORIGINAL PAPERS Gynecology
Published online: 2019-12-31

Abstract

Objectives: The study aimed to examine the predisposing factors that play a role in the development of complications in patients undergoing vaginal hysterectomy. Material and methods: This retrospective analysis was performed on data provided from 239 patients who underwent vaginal hysterectomy due to uterine prolapse at a single centre between January 2008 and August 2018. Complications were defined according to Clavien-Dindo classification of complications. The patients were divided into two groups: with and without complications. We built a model using multivariable logistic regression to examine the relationships between complications and five candidate predictors. Results: Intra/postoperative complications developed in 30 patients, and the complication rate was found to be 12.5%. 87.2% of the reported complications were classified as Grade ≤ 2 according to Clavien-Dindo system. It was found that complications were associated with factors such as intraoperative concurrent salpingo-oophorectomy [Odds ratio (OR): 1.24 (1.1–1.4)], low preoperative haemoglobin [OR: 0.96 (0.94–0.98)], uterine weight [OR: 2.69 (2.62–2.76)], and long operation time [OR: 1.04 (1.02–1.07)]. History of pelvic surgery was not found to increase complication rate [OR: 1.11 (0.96–1.27), p = 0.13]. Our multiple logistic regression model correctly classified 74% of participants within the Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curve. Conclusions: Preoperative anaemia, large uterus and concomitant adnexectomy were found to be factors associated with complications during and after vaginal hysterectomy for pelvic organ prolapse.

Abstract

Objectives: The study aimed to examine the predisposing factors that play a role in the development of complications in patients undergoing vaginal hysterectomy. Material and methods: This retrospective analysis was performed on data provided from 239 patients who underwent vaginal hysterectomy due to uterine prolapse at a single centre between January 2008 and August 2018. Complications were defined according to Clavien-Dindo classification of complications. The patients were divided into two groups: with and without complications. We built a model using multivariable logistic regression to examine the relationships between complications and five candidate predictors. Results: Intra/postoperative complications developed in 30 patients, and the complication rate was found to be 12.5%. 87.2% of the reported complications were classified as Grade ≤ 2 according to Clavien-Dindo system. It was found that complications were associated with factors such as intraoperative concurrent salpingo-oophorectomy [Odds ratio (OR): 1.24 (1.1–1.4)], low preoperative haemoglobin [OR: 0.96 (0.94–0.98)], uterine weight [OR: 2.69 (2.62–2.76)], and long operation time [OR: 1.04 (1.02–1.07)]. History of pelvic surgery was not found to increase complication rate [OR: 1.11 (0.96–1.27), p = 0.13]. Our multiple logistic regression model correctly classified 74% of participants within the Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curve. Conclusions: Preoperative anaemia, large uterus and concomitant adnexectomy were found to be factors associated with complications during and after vaginal hysterectomy for pelvic organ prolapse.

Get Citation

Keywords

vaginal hysterectomy; perioperative complications; predisposing factors; concurrent salpingo-oophorectomy; uterine weight; operation time

Supplementary Files (2)
title page
Download
17KB
cover letter
Download
27KB
About this article
Title

Factors associated with complications of vaginal hysterectomy in patients with pelvic organ prolapse — a single centre’s experience

Journal

Ginekologia Polska

Issue

Vol 90, No 12 (2019)

Pages

692-698

Published online

2019-12-31

DOI

10.5603/GP.2019.0118

Pubmed

31909461

Bibliographic record

Ginekol Pol 2019;90(12):692-698.

Keywords

vaginal hysterectomy
perioperative complications
predisposing factors
concurrent salpingo-oophorectomy
uterine weight
operation time

Authors

Nurullah Peker
Edip Aydın
Mustafa Yavuz
Muhammet Hanifi Bademkıran
Serhat Ege
Talip Karaçor
Elif Ağaçayak

References (24)
  1. Wright JD, Herzog TJ, Tsui J, et al. Nationwide trends in the performance of inpatient hysterectomy in the United States. Obstet Gynecol. 2013; 122(2 Pt 1): 233–241.
  2. Aarts JWM, Nieboer TE, Johnson N, et al. Surgical approach to hysterectomy for benign gynaecological disease. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015(8): CD003677.
  3. Gupta J. Vaginal hysterectomy is the best minimal access method for hysterectomy. Evid Based Med. 2015; 20(6): 210.
  4. Boyles SH, Weber AM, Meyn L. Procedures for pelvic organ prolapse in the United States, 1979-1997. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2003; 188(1): 108–115.
  5. Yassa M, Tug N. Uterus-preserving Laparoscopic Lateral Suspension with Mesh Operation in Pelvic Organ Prolapse: Initial Experience in a Single Tertiary Center with a Median 24-Month Follow-up. Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd. 2019; 79(9): 983–992.
  6. Pandey D, Sehgal K, Saxena A, et al. An audit of indications, complications, and justification of hysterectomies at a teaching hospital in India. Int J Reprod Med. 2014; 2014: 279273.
  7. Louie M, Strassle PD, Moulder JK, et al. Uterine weight and complications after abdominal, laparoscopic, and vaginal hysterectomy. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2018; 219(5): 480.e1–480.e8.
  8. Dessources K, Hou JY, Tergas AI, et al. Factors associated with 30-day hospital readmission after hysterectomy. Obstet Gynecol. 2015; 125(2): 461–470.
  9. Karacan T, Ozyurek E, Wetherilt LS, et al. Safety and efficacy of using advanced electrosurgical bipolar vessel sealing during vaginal hysterectomy in morbidly obese patients: a retrospective cohort analysis. Ginekol Pol. 2017; 88(10): 523–529.
  10. Akyol D, Esinler I, Guven S, et al. Vaginal hysterectomy: results and complications of 886 patients. J Obstet Gynaecol. 2006; 26(8): 777–781.
  11. Persu C, Chapple CR, Cauni V, et al. Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification System (POP-Q) - a new era in pelvic prolapse staging. J Med Life. 2011; 4(1): 75–81.
  12. Dindo D. The Clavien–Dindo Classification of Surgical Complications. Treatment of Postoperative Complications After Digestive Surgery. 2013: 13–17.
  13. CW Z. Vaginal hysterectomy. TeLinde’s Oper Gynecol 11 n.d.:P715.
  14. Jeppson PC, Balgobin S, Rahn DD, et al. Society of Gynecologic Surgeons Systematic Review Group. Comparison of Vaginal Hysterectomy Techniques and Interventions for Benign Indications: A Systematic Review. Obstet Gynecol. 2017; 129(5): 877–886.
  15. Sewell T, Courtney H, Tawfeek S, et al. The feasibility and safety of transvaginal bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2018; 141(3): 344–348.
  16. Antosh DD, High R, Brown HW, et al. Feasibility of prophylactic salpingectomy during vaginal hysterectomy. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2017; 217(5): 605.e1–605.e5.
  17. Sirota I, Tomita S, Dabney L, et al. Overcoming barriers to vaginal hysterectomy: an analysis of perioperative outcomes. J Turk Ger Gynecol Assoc. 2018.
  18. Newbold P, Vithayathil M, Fatania K, et al. Is vaginal hysterectomy is equally safe for the enlarged and normally sized non-prolapse uterus? A cohort study assessing outcomes. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2015; 185: 74–77.
  19. Schmitt JJ, Occhino JA, Weaver AL, et al. Outcomes of Vaginal Hysterectomy With and Without Perceived Contraindications to Vaginal Surgery. Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg. 2019; 25(1): 41–48.
  20. Agostini A, Bretelle F, Cravello L, et al. Vaginal hysterectomy in nulliparous women without prolapse: a prospective comparative study. BJOG. 2003; 110(5): 515–518.
  21. Chrysostomou A, Djokovic D, Edridge W, et al. Evidence-based guidelines for vaginal hysterectomy of the International Society for Gynecologic Endoscopy (ISGE). Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2018; 231: 262–267.
  22. Turgut A, Soydinç HE, Evsen MS, et al. Which parameters may influence the duration of hospitalization after vaginal hysterectomy? J Turk Ger Gynecol Assoc. 2013; 14(1): 15–18.
  23. Ottosen C, Lingman G, Ottosen L. Three methods for hysterectomy: a randomised, prospective study of short term outcome. BJOG. 2000; 107(11): 1380–1385.
  24. Mehta A, Xu T, Hutfless S, et al. Patient, surgeon, and hospital disparities associated with benign hysterectomy approach and perioperative complications. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2017; 216(5): 497.e1–497.e10.

Important: This website uses cookies. More >>

The cookies allow us to identify your computer and find out details about your last visit. They remembering whether you've visited the site before, so that you remain logged in - or to help us work out how many new website visitors we get each month. Most internet browsers accept cookies automatically, but you can change the settings of your browser to erase cookies or prevent automatic acceptance if you prefer.

By "Via Medica sp. z o.o." sp.k., ul. Świętokrzyska 73, 80–180 Gdańsk
tel.:+48 58 320 94 94, faks:+48 58 320 94 60, e-mail:  viamedica@viamedica.pl