Abstract
OBJECTIVE To examine studies that explored the differences between laparoscopic assisted vaginal hysterectomy (LAVH) and total abdominal hysterectomy (TAH) in endometrial cancer (EC) patients, and to determine which surgical intervention has better outcomes.
DATA SOURCES Electronic search of the following databases was performed; Google Scholar, PubMed/Medline, Wiley, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Embase, and EBSCO Host.
METHODS of STUDY SELECTION All full English articles in the form of randomized controlled trials (RCT), prospective cohort (PC), and retrospective cohort (RC) comparing LAVH and TAH outcomes in endometrial cancer patients was included in this study. A complete search of the literature comparing the outcomes of LAVH and AH in EC patients. This study was registered in PROSPERO [ID: CRD42021225509] and follows PRISMA and MOOSE guidelines. Outcomes included length of hospital stay, surgical duration, complications, blood transfusion requirements, and blood loss.
TABULATION ROBINS-1, ROB 2.0, and ROBVIS was used to assess the risk of bias. Statistical tests used included relative risk (RR) for dichotomous and standard mean difference (SMD) for continuous variable. A P value less than 0.05 was considered significant. A forest plot was used to visually demonstrate the analyses for all outcomes.
INTEGRATION and RESULTS A total of 13 articles (total cohort n=14,803) were included in the systematic review and metanalysis. The total cohort for LAVH patients was n=1845 and n=12,958 for TAH. Patients who underwent a TAH had significantly higher risk of complications [RR = 0.547, p<0.001], greater risk for blood transfusion [RR = 0.349, p<0.033], more blood loss [SMD = −3.256, p<0.001], and longer hospital stay [SMD = −1.351, p<0.001]. LAVH patients had longer operating time [SMD= 1.103, p<0.001] compared TAH patients.
CONCLUSION LAVH presented with lower of hospital stay, complications, amount of blood loss, and blood transfusion requirements when compared to TAH. LAVH in the appropriate setting and skills may be a safer alternative than TAH.
- Laparoscopic Assisted Vaginal
- Abdominal
- Hysterectomy
- Endometrial carcinoma
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This study did not receive any funding.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Footnotes
Esraa Menshawey esraa.menshawey{at}gmail.com
Rahma Menshawey rahma.menshawey.94{at}gmail.com
Conflict of Interest: The authors report no conflict of interest.
Author Disclosure: All authors have approved of this manuscript. None of the authors of this manuscript have received any funding or have any financial interest/ arrangement or affiliation with any governmental or non-governmental institutions/ sponsors.
Data Availability
All data produced in the present work are contained in the manuscript.