Suture versus vessel sealer in vaginal hysterectomy: an observational study
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.18203/2320-1770.ijrcog20174034Keywords:
Blood loss, Conventional sutures, Electrosurgical bipolar vessel sealer, Vaginal hysterectomyAbstract
Background: Vaginal route is considered to be the method of choice for removal of uterus and, in the absence of gross pelvic disease, can be carried out in most patients. Recent studies have shown that less than one-third of hysterectomies are performed vaginally. This could be due to technical difficulties occurring while operating in the narrow surgical field. This study was taken up to find out the easier alternatives in securing pedicles by using Electrosurgical Bipolar Vessel Sealer in Vaginal Hysterectomy.
Methods: A prospective observational study was conducted in the Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, BRD Medical College, Gorakhpur over a period of one year i.e. July 15 to June 16. A total of 62 patients posted for vaginal hysterectomy for benign conditions were enrolled after informed consent. Results were recorded under headings of procedure time (min), blood loss (ml), major intra-operative complications and post operative complications, post-operative pain (on VAS) and duration of hospital stay.
Results: Mean procedure time in suture method was found to be 55.66min, whereas, in sealer group it was 27.75 min. Mean blood loss in the sealer group was 83.78ml, while, in suture group it was 156.62ml. Mean pain score on Visual Analogue Scale on POD 1 was 8.44±1.1522 for suture group and 6±1.325 for sealer group. Mean pain score on POD2 in sealer group was 3.48±1.325 and in the suture group it was 5.31±1.754 (P<0.0001). Mean pain score on POD3 in suture group 2.82±0.508, in sealer group it was 1.0909±0.608 (P<0.0001). Pain scores, thereafter, did not differ significantly. Mean length of stay in suture group is 10.71 days (suture group) versus 5.3 days (sealer group). Blood loss >200ml was observed in 29.03% of suture cases, none in the sealer group (P-value .0006). Labial burn occurred in 2 out of 32patients in sealer group.
Conclusions: From above study, we conclude that bipolar vessel sealer has shown a significant reduction in intra-operative blood loss, procedure time, immediate post-operative pain (POD1,2&3), mean length of stay in hospital, major intra-operative blood loss>200ml which was found in significant number of cases in suture group.
References
Richardson RE, Bournas N, Magos AL. Is laparoscopic hysterectomy a waste of time? Lancet 1995;345:36-41.
Kovac SR. Hysterectomy outcomes in patients with similar indications. Obstet Gynecol. 2000;95:787-793.
Darai E, Soriano D, Kimata P, Laplace C, Lecuru F. Vaginal hysterectomy for enlarged uteri, with or without laparoscopic assistance:randomised study. Obstet Gynecol. 2001;97:712-6.
Doucette RC, Sharp HT, Alder SC. Challenging generally accepted contraindications to vaginal hysterectomy. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2001;184:1386-91.
Maresh MJA, Metcalfe MA, Mc Pherson K, Overton C, Hall V, Hargreaves J et al. The value national hysterectomy study: description of the patients and their surgery. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 2002;109:302-12.
Farquhar CM, Steiner CA. Hysterectomy rates in the United States 1990-1997. Obstet Gynecol. 2002;99:229-234.
Kennedy JS, Stranahan PL, Taylor KD, Chandler JG. High-burst strength, feedback-controlled bipolar vessel sealing. Surg Endosc. 1998;12:876-8.
Fleshman J. Advanced technology in the management of haemorrhoids: stapling, Laser, harmonic scalpel and ligasure. J Gastrointest Surg. 2002;6(3):299-301.
Bran DF, Spellman JR, Summitt RL Jr. Outpatient vaginal hysterectomy as a new trend in gynecology. AORN J. 1995;62:810-4.
Lakeman MM, van der Vaart CH, Roovers JP. Hysterectomy and lower urinary tract symptoms: a nonrandomized comparison of vaginal and abdominal hysterectomy. Gynecol Obstet Invest. 2010;70:100-6.
Lakeman MM, van der Vaart CH, Roovers JP. A long-term prospective study to compare the effects of vaginal and abdominal hysterectomy. BJOG. 2011;118(12):1511-7.
Bani-Irshaid I, Nussair B. Ligasure Vessel Sealing System versus Conventional Suture Ligation Method in Vaginal Hysterectomy. J Royal Med Serv. 2014;21(4):25-31.
Pandey D, Sehgal K, Saxena A, Hebbar S, Nambiar J, Bhat RG. An audit of indications, complications, and justification of hysterectomies at a teaching hospital in India. Int J Reprod Med. 2014;2014.
Kovac SR. Vaginal hysterectomy. Baillieres’ Clin Obstet Gynecol. 1997;11:95-110.
Lakeman M, The S, Schellart R, Dietz V, ter Haar J, Thurkow A et al. Electrosurgical bipolar vessel sealing versus conventional clamping and suturing for vaginal hysterectomy: a randomised controlled trial. BJOG. 2012;119:1473-82.
Levy B, Emery L. Randomized trial of suture versus electrosurgical bipolar vessel sealing in vaginal hysterectomy. Obstet Gynecol. 2003;102(1):147-51.
Hefni MA, Bhaumik J, El-Toukhy T, Kho P, Wong I, Abdel‐Razik T et al. Safety and efficacy of using the LigaSure vessel sealing system for securing the pedicles in vaginal hysterectomy: randomised controlled trial. BJOG 2005;112(3):329-333.
Ding Z, Wable M, Rane A. Use of Ligasure bipolar diathermy system in Vaginal Hysterectomy. J Obstet Gynecol. 2005;25(1):49-51.
Cronje HS, Coning EC. Electrosurgical bipolar vessel sealing during vaginal hysterectomy. Int J Gynecol Obstet. 2005;91(3):243-5.
Zubke W, Hornung R, Wässerer S, Hucke J, Füllers U, Werner C et al. Bipolar coagulation with the BiClamp® forceps versus conventional suture ligation: a multicenter randomized controlled trial in 175 vaginal hysterectomy patients. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2009;280(5):753-60.
Elhao M, Abdallah K, Serag I, El-Laithy M, Agur W. Efficacy of using electrosurgical bipolar vessel sealing during vaginal hysterectomy in patients with different degrees of operative difficulty: a randomised controlled trial. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2009;147(1):86-90.
Silva-Filho AL, Rodrigues AM, de Castro Monteiro MV, da Rosa DG, e Silva YM, Werneck RA et al. Randomised study of bipolar vessel sealing system versus conventional suture ligation for Vaginal Hysterectomy. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2009;146(2):200-3.
Clavé H, Baar H, Niccolai P. Painless vaginal hysterectomy with thermal hemostasis (results of a series of 152 cases). Gynecol Surg. 2005;2:101-5.
