Impact of previous caesarean section on outcomes of non-descent vaginal hysterectomy: a prospective comparative study
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.18203/2320-1770.ijrcog20261266Keywords:
Non-decent vaginal hysterectomy, Caesarean section, Vaginal hysterectomy, Surgical outcomesAbstract
Background: With rising caesarean section rates, an increasing number of women undergoing hysterectomy have a scarred uterus. Previous lower segment caesarean section (LSCS) is often considered a relative limitation for non-descent vaginal hysterectomy (NDVH) due to concerns regarding adhesions and bladder injury. This study aimed to prospectively compare perioperative outcomes of NDVH in women with and without prior LSCS.
Methods: This prospective comparative observational study was conducted at a tertiary care centre from February 2024 to January 2025. Fifty women undergoing NDVH for benign indications were enrolled and divided into two groups: group A included women with previous lower segment caesarean section (LSCS) (n=10), and group B included women with no prior surgery (n=40). Operative time, estimated blood loss, intraoperative and postoperative complications, and conversion rates were compared. Statistical analysis was performed using the Mann–Whitney U test and Fisher’s exact test, with p<0.05 considered statistically significant.
Results: Baseline demographic parameters were comparable between the two groups. Mean operative time was 43±6 minutes in LSCS group versus 49±7 minutes in control group (p=0.08). Mean blood loss was 85±20 ml versus 120±25 ml (p=0.06). Conversion rate was 10% versus 5% (p=0.52). One case in previous LSCS group required conversion due to dense anterior abdominal adhesions and positive Sheth’s sign, while two cases in no prior surgery group were converted due to large transverse diameter of uterus. No bladder or bowel injury occurred in either group. Prophylactic salpingectomy was feasible in the majority of cases in both groups.
Conclusions: In this prospective cohort, previous LSCS was not associated with increased perioperative morbidity during NDVH. Larger studies are required to confirm these findings.
References
Kovac SR. Route of hysterectomy: an evidence-based approach. Clin Obstet Gynecol. 2014;57(1):58-71.
AAGL Advancing Minimally Invasive Gynecology Worldwide. AAGL position statement: route of hysterectomy to treat benign uterine disease. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2011;18(1):1-3.
National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Heavy menstrual bleeding: assessment and management. NICE guideline NG88. 2021.
Aarts JW, Nieboer TE, Johnson N, Tavender E, Garry R, Mol BW, et al. Surgical approach to hysterectomy for benign gynaecological disease. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015;2015(8):CD003677.
Sheth SS, Malpani AN. Vaginal hysterectomy following previous cesarean section. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 1995;50(2):165-9.
Weiss M, Baumfeld Y, Rotem R, Gedalia Y, Erenberg M, Weintraub AY. The impact of a previous cesarean section on the risk of perioperative and postoperative complications during vaginal hysterectomy. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2024;164(2):557-62.
Hesselman S, Högberg U, Jonsson M. Effect of remote cesarean delivery on complications during hysterectomy: a cohort study. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2017;217(5):564.
Maiti GD, Pillai A, Jose T, Lele PR. Non-descent vaginal hysterectomy in women with previous caesarean section scar: our experience. Int J Reprod Contracept Obstet Gynecol. 2018;7(6):2404-9.
Jacob KJ, Divya MB. Non-descent vaginal hysterectomy in previous caesarean section. Int J Reprod Contracept Obstet Gynecol. 2020; 9(8):3239-42.
Mehta ST, Trivedi YN, Bhalodia P. Role of non-descent vaginal hysterectomy in advancing gynaecological practice. J Medi Sci. 2014;3:55-8.
Paparella P, Sizzi O, Rossetti A, De Benedittis F, Paparella R. Vaginal hysterectomy in generally considered contraindications to vaginal surgery. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2004;270(2):104-9.
Stovall TG. Hysterectomy. Berek and Novak’s Gynecol. 14th ed. 2007;22:805.
Committee Opinion No 701: Choosing the Route of Hysterectomy for Benign Disease. Obstet Gynecol. 2017;129(6):e155-9.