open access

Vol 89, No 5 (2018)
ORIGINAL PAPERS Gynecology
Published online: 2018-05-30
Get Citation

Single-layer versus double-layer closure of the vaginal cuff with barbed sutures in laparoscopic hysterectomy

Dogukan Yildirim, Sefik Eser Ozyurek, Huseyin Kiyak, Agahan Han, Nadiye Koroglu, Aysegul Bestel, Fitnat Topbas
DOI: 10.5603/GP.a2018.0040
·
Pubmed: 30084473
·
Ginekol Pol 2018;89(5):229-234.

open access

Vol 89, No 5 (2018)
ORIGINAL PAPERS Gynecology
Published online: 2018-05-30

Abstract

Objectives: The utilization of barbed sutures in laparoscopic hysterectomy has become popular among gynecologic sur­geons. Our aim was to compare the outcomes of two different techniques for closing the vaginal cuff with barbed sutures in laparoscopic hysterectomies. Material and methods: A retrospective study was completed on 202 patients who underwent laparoscopic hysterectomy for benign diseases at Istanbul Kanuni Sultan Suleyman Training and Research Hospital from April 2014 through June 2016. In group 1 (n = 139), a single-layer continuous suturing method was used; each bite contained the pubocervical fascia and vaginal mucosa anteriorly, and vaginal mucosa and rectovaginal fascia posteriorly. In group 2 (n = 63), a double-layer continuous suturing method was used; only vaginal mucosa was included in the first layer, and a second layer incorporated the pubocervical and rectovaginal fascias. Results: Patient characteristics (age, body mass index, parity, previous abdominal surgery, smoking, comorbidity) were similar between the two groups. There were also no differences in total operation time, length of hospitalization, intraop­erative complications, and perioperative change in hemoglobin levels. There was no difference between the two groups in terms of vaginal cuff dehiscence, which was the primary outcome measure of the study. Secondary outcome measures (presence of granulation tissue, spotting, cuff cellulitis) were also similar between the two groups.  Conclusions: We observed no differences in outcomes between single- or double-layer vaginal closure techniques with barbed sutures.

Abstract

Objectives: The utilization of barbed sutures in laparoscopic hysterectomy has become popular among gynecologic sur­geons. Our aim was to compare the outcomes of two different techniques for closing the vaginal cuff with barbed sutures in laparoscopic hysterectomies. Material and methods: A retrospective study was completed on 202 patients who underwent laparoscopic hysterectomy for benign diseases at Istanbul Kanuni Sultan Suleyman Training and Research Hospital from April 2014 through June 2016. In group 1 (n = 139), a single-layer continuous suturing method was used; each bite contained the pubocervical fascia and vaginal mucosa anteriorly, and vaginal mucosa and rectovaginal fascia posteriorly. In group 2 (n = 63), a double-layer continuous suturing method was used; only vaginal mucosa was included in the first layer, and a second layer incorporated the pubocervical and rectovaginal fascias. Results: Patient characteristics (age, body mass index, parity, previous abdominal surgery, smoking, comorbidity) were similar between the two groups. There were also no differences in total operation time, length of hospitalization, intraop­erative complications, and perioperative change in hemoglobin levels. There was no difference between the two groups in terms of vaginal cuff dehiscence, which was the primary outcome measure of the study. Secondary outcome measures (presence of granulation tissue, spotting, cuff cellulitis) were also similar between the two groups.  Conclusions: We observed no differences in outcomes between single- or double-layer vaginal closure techniques with barbed sutures.

Get Citation

Keywords

barbed suture, vaginal cuff dehiscence, laparoscopic hysterectomy, closure technique

About this article
Title

Single-layer versus double-layer closure of the vaginal cuff with barbed sutures in laparoscopic hysterectomy

Journal

Ginekologia Polska

Issue

Vol 89, No 5 (2018)

Pages

229-234

Published online

2018-05-30

DOI

10.5603/GP.a2018.0040

Pubmed

30084473

Bibliographic record

Ginekol Pol 2018;89(5):229-234.

Keywords

barbed suture
vaginal cuff dehiscence
laparoscopic hysterectomy
closure technique

Authors

Dogukan Yildirim
Sefik Eser Ozyurek
Huseyin Kiyak
Agahan Han
Nadiye Koroglu
Aysegul Bestel
Fitnat Topbas

References (30)
  1. Cong L, Li C, Wei B, et al. V-Loc™ 180 suture in total laparoscopic hysterectomy: a retrospective study comparing Polysorb to barbed suture used for vaginal cuff closure. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2016; 207: 18–22.
  2. ACOG Committee Opinion No. 444: choosing the route of hysterectomy for benign disease. Obstet Gynecol. 2009; 114(5): 1156–1158.
  3. REICH H, DeCAPRIO J, McGLYNN F. Laparoscopic Hysterectomy. Journal of Gynecologic Surgery. 1989; 5(2): 213–216.
  4. Cohen SL, Vitonis AF, Einarsson JI. Updated hysterectomy surveillance and factors associated with minimally invasive hysterectomy. JSLS. 2014; 18(3).
  5. Jacoby VL, Autry A, Jacobson G, et al. Nationwide use of laparoscopic hysterectomy compared with abdominal and vaginal approaches. Obstet Gynecol. 2009; 114(5): 1041–1048.
  6. Desai VB, Guo XM, Fan L, et al. Inpatient Laparoscopic Hysterectomy in the United States: Trends and Factors Associated With Approach Selection. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2017; 24(1): 151–158.e1.
  7. Fanning J, Kesterson J, Davies M, et al. Effects of electrosurgery and vaginal closure technique on postoperative vaginal cuff dehiscence. JSLS. 2013; 17(3): 414–417.
  8. Hur HC, Guido RS, Mansuria SM, et al. Incidence and patient characteristics of vaginal cuff dehiscence after different modes of hysterectomies. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2007; 14(3): 311–317.
  9. Siedhoff MT, Yunker AC, Steege JF. Decreased incidence of vaginal cuff dehiscence after laparoscopic closure with bidirectional barbed suture. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2011; 18(2): 218–223.
  10. Rettenmaier MA, Abaid LN, Brown JV, et al. Dramatically reduced incidence of vaginal cuff dehiscence in gynecologic patients undergoing endoscopic closure with barbed sutures: A retrospective cohort study. Int J Surg. 2015; 19: 27–30.
  11. Nieboer TE, Johnson N, Lethaby A, et al. Surgical approach to hysterectomy for benign gynaecological disease. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2009(3): CD003677.
  12. Uccella S, Ceccaroni M, Cromi A, et al. Vaginal cuff dehiscence in a series of 12,398 hysterectomies: effect of different types of colpotomy and vaginal closure. Obstet Gynecol. 2012; 120(3): 516–523.
  13. Ceccaroni M, Berretta R, Malzoni M, et al. Vaginal cuff dehiscence after hysterectomy: a multicenter retrospective study. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2011; 158(2): 308–313.
  14. Hur HC, Donnellan N, Mansuria S, et al. Vaginal cuff dehiscence after different modes of hysterectomy. Obstet Gynecol. 2011; 118(4): 794–801.
  15. Somkuti SG, Vieta PA, Daugherty JF, et al. Transvaginal evisceration after hysterectomy in premenopausal women: a presentation of three cases. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1994; 171(2): 567–568.
  16. Tulikangas PK, Smith T, Falcone T, et al. Gross and histologic characteristics of laparoscopic injuries with four different energy sources. Fertil Steril. 2001; 75(4): 806–810.
  17. Gruber DD, Warner WB, Lombardini ED, et al. Laparoscopic hysterectomy using various energy sources in swine: a histopathologic assessment. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2011; 205(5): 494.e1–494.e6.
  18. Uccella S, Ghezzi F, Mariani A, et al. Vaginal cuff closure after minimally invasive hysterectomy: our experience and systematic review of the literature. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2011; 205(2): 119.e1–119.12.
  19. Greenberg JA. The use of barbed sutures in obstetrics and gynecology. Rev Obstet Gynecol. 2010; 3(3): 82–91.
  20. Nawfal AK, Eisenstein D, Theoharis E, et al. Vaginal cuff closure during robotic-assisted total laparoscopic hysterectomy: comparing vicryl to barbed sutures. JSLS. 2012; 16(4): 525–529.
  21. Ardovino M, Castaldi MA, Fraternali F, et al. Bidirectional barbed suture in total laparoscopic hysterectomy and lymph node dissection for endometrial cancer: technical evaluation and 1-year follow-up of 61 patients. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 2013; 23(4): 347–350.
  22. Medina BC, Giraldo CH, Riaño G, et al. Barbed suture for vaginal cuff closure in laparoscopic hysterectomy. JSLS. 2014; 18(1): 83–88.
  23. Kim JH, Byun SW, Song JY, et al. Barbed versus conventional 2-layer continuous running sutures for laparoscopic vaginal cuff closure. Medicine (Baltimore). 2016; 95(39): e4981.
  24. Cong L, Li C, Wei B, et al. V-Loc™ 180 suture in total laparoscopic hysterectomy: a retrospective study comparing Polysorb to barbed suture used for vaginal cuff closure. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2016; 207: 18–22.
  25. Tsafrir Z, Palmer M, Dahlman M, et al. Long-term outcomes for different vaginal cuff closure techniques in robotic-assisted laparoscopic hysterectomy: A randomized controlled trial. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2017; 210: 7–12.
  26. Blikkendaal MD, Twijnstra ARH, Pacquee SCL, et al. Vaginal cuff dehiscence in laparoscopic hysterectomy: influence of various suturing methods of the vaginal vault. Gynecol Surg. 2012; 9(4): 393–400.
  27. Einarsson JI, Cohen SL, Gobern JM, et al. Barbed versus standard suture: a randomized trial for laparoscopic vaginal cuff closure. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2013; 20(4): 492–498.
  28. Bogliolo S, Nadalini C, Iacobone AD, et al. Vaginal cuff closure with absorbable bidirectional barbed suture during total laparoscopic hysterectomy. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2013; 170(1): 219–221.
  29. Smith K, Caceres A. Vaginal Cuff Closure in Minimally Invasive Hysterectomy: A Review of Training, Techniques, and Materials. Cureus. 2017; 9(10): e1766.
  30. Jeung InC, Baek JM, Park EK, et al. A prospective comparison of vaginal stump suturing techniques during total laparoscopic hysterectomy. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2010; 282(6): 631–638.

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