Background: Many hysterectomies are now performed by laparoscopic assisted vaginal hysterectomy (LAVH) technique. To establish LAVH as a routine procedure remains controversial, partly because of concerns about the cost. We studied hospital charges and cost of LAVH as compared to vaginal hysterectomy (VH) for non-prolapse uterus in clinically similar groups of patients. Study design: This was a cross-sectional analytic study, covering a period of two years. This study was undertaken at the Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology of the Charlotte Maxeke Johannesburg Academic Hospital (CMJAH), to determine the direct hospital costs between the two surgical techniques VH and LAVH respectively. Women admitted for hysterectomy for benign uterine conditions, were enrolled in the study. Criteria for inclusion were uterine size less than 12 weeks gestation, width ≤ 9 cm and length ≤ 14 cm on ultrasound examination. Clinical ovarian pathology and uterine prolapse were criteria for exclusion. Patients were recruited from the unit records and divided into two groups matched with respect to age, parity, and indications for hysterectomy. Vaginal hysterectomy was performed in 60 patients out of the 100 patients included in the study, and 40 patients underwent LAVH. Results: All cases were successfully performed with no need to convert to the abdominal route. The time required for LAVH was significantly longer as compared to VH: 64, 0 v 31,3 minutes respectively (p<0.001). The postoperative hospital stay days and opiate injections required were both not significantly different between the VH and LAVH groups. Longer operating time and, as well as the expenses of the equipment to perform LAVH, were the main sources of additional cost in LAVH. The average hospital charges were significantly higher in LAVH as compared to VH (p<0.001). Conclusion: Both techniques offer the same benefits of shorter hospital stay, less analgesia needed, rapid mobilisation, and early discharge. However, VH was found to be least costly, mainly due to significant less operative time. LAVH is significantly costlier, mainly due to expensive laparoscopic devices and afore-mentioned long operation time.
| Published in | Journal of Gynecology and Obstetrics (Volume 9, Issue 6) |
| DOI | 10.11648/j.jgo.20210906.19 |
| Page(s) | 237-242 |
| Creative Commons |
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, provided the original work is properly cited. |
| Copyright |
Copyright © The Author(s), 2024. Published by Science Publishing Group |
Benign Gynaecological Pathology, Vaginal Hysterectomy, Laparoscopic Assisted Vaginal Hysterectomy, Non-prolapse Uterus, Hysterectomy Cost
| [1] | Domingo S, Pellicer A. Overview of current trends in hysterectomy. Expert Rev ObstetGynecol. 2009; 4 (6): 673-685. |
| [2] | Garry R. The future of hysterectomy. BJOG. 2005; 112: 133-39. |
| [3] | Michael, D., Mremi, A., Swai, P. et al. Gynecological hysterectomy in Northern Tanzania: a cross- sectional study on the outcomes and correlation between clinical and histological diagnoses. BMC Women's Health 20, 122 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12905-020-00985-9. |
| [4] | Bukhari L, Bukhari AA, Albakri OF, Alshamrani AF, Alahmadi WE, Hassan SO. Abduljabbar HSO. A retrospective review: vaginal versus abdominal hysterectomy for benign gynecological diseases in a tertiary centre. DOI: 10.4236/ojog.2016.612094. |
| [5] | Mukhopadhaya N, Manyonda IT. The hysterectomy story in The United Kingdom. J Midlife Health. 2013; 4 (1): 40-41. |
| [6] | Wu JM, Wechter ME, Geller EJ, Nguyen TV, Visco AG. Hysterectomy rates in the United States, 2003. Obstet Gynecol. 2007; 110 (5): 1091-95. |
| [7] | Liu F, Pan Y, Liang Y, Zhang C, Deng Q, Li X, Liu M, He Z, Liu Y, Li J, Ning T, Guo C, Xu R, Zhang L, Cai H, Ke Y. The epidemiological profile of hysterectomy in rural Chinese women: a population-based study. BMJ Open. 2017; 7 (6): e015351. |
| [8] | Jiang J, Ding T, Luo A, Lu Y, Ma D, Wang S. Comparison of surgical indications for hysterectomy by age and approach in 4653 Chinese women. Frontiers of Medicine. 2014; 8 (4): 464-470. |
| [9] | Singh A, Arora A. Why hysterectomy rate is lower in India. Indian Journal of Community Medicine.2008; 33 (3): 196-97 |
| [10] | Pandey D, Sehgal K, Saxena A, Hebbar S, Nambiar J, Bhat R. An Audit of Indications, Complications, and Justification of Hysterectomies at a Teaching Hospital in India. International Journal of Reproductive Medicine. 2014; 2014: 1-6. |
| [11] | Toma A, Hopman W, Gorwill R. Hysterectomy at a Canadian tertiary care facility: results of a one-year retrospective review. BMC Women's Health. 2004; 4 (1): 10. |
| [12] | Augusto K, Brilhante A, Modesto G, Saboia D, Rocha C, Karbage S, Magalhães T, Bezerra L. Costs and mortality rates of surgical approaches to hysterectomy in Brazil. Revista de SaúdePública. 2018; 52: 25 https://doi.org/10.11606/S1518-8787.2018052000129. |
| [13] | Sheeth S. The scope of vaginal hysterectomy. European Journal of Obstetrics &Gynecology and Reproductive Biology. 2004; 115 (2): 224-230. |
| [14] | Nieboer TE, Johnson N, Lethaby A, Tavender E, Curr E, Garry R, van Voorst S, Mol BW, Kluivers KB. Surgical approach to hysterectomy for benign gynaecological disease. Cochrane Database of Syst Rev. 2009; (3): CD003677. |
| [15] | Garry R, Fountain J, Mason S, Hawe J, Napp V, Abbott J, Clayton R, Phillips G, Whittaker M, Lilford R, Bridgman S, Brown J. The eVALuate study: two parallel randomised trials, one comparing laparoscopic with abdominal hysterectomy, the other comparing with vaginal hysterectomy. BMJ. 2004; 328: 129-33. |
| [16] | Chrysostomou A, Djokovic D, Libhaber E, Edridge W, van Herendael B. Formal institutional guidelines promotes the vaginal approach to hysterectomy in patients with benign disease and non-prolapsed uterus, Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 259 (2021) 133–139. |
| [17] | Johnson N, Barlow D, Lethaby A, Tavender E, Curr E, Garry R. Surgical approach to hysterectomy for benign gynaecological disease. Cochrane Database of Syst Rev. 2006; (2): CD003677. |
| [18] | Aarts JW, Nieboer TE, Johnson N, Tavender E, Garry R, Mol BW, Kluivers KB. Surgical approach to hysterectomy for benign gynaecological disease. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015; (8): CD003677. |
| [19] | McCracken G, Hunter D, Morgan D, Price JH. Comparison of laparoscopic-assisted vaginal hysterectomy, total abdominal hysterectomy, and vaginal hysterectomy. Ulster Med J. 2006; 75 (1): 54-58. |
| [20] | Spilsbury K, Semmens JB, Hammond I, Block A. Persistent high rates of hysterectomy in Western Australia: a population-based study of 83 000 procedures over 23 years. BJOG. 2006; 113: 804-809. |
| [21] | Pandey D, Sehgal K, Saxena A, Hebbar S, Nambiar J, Bhat R. An Audit of Indications, Complications, and Justification of Hysterectomies at a Teaching Hospital in India. IntJRep Med2014. Open access: ID 279273. |
| [22] | Burkett D, Horwitz J, Kennedy V, Murphy D, Graziano S, Kenton K. Assessing current trends in resident hysterectomy training. Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg. 2011; 17 (5): 210-14. |
| [23] | Dorsey JH, Holtz PM, McGrath MM, Steinberg EP. Costs and charges associated with three alternative techniques of hysterectomy. N Engl J Med 1996; 335 (7): 476-482. |
| [24] | Nehtat C, Bess O, Admon D, Nezhat CH, Nezhat F. Hospital cost comparison between abdominal vaginal and laparoscopic- assisted vaginal hysterectomies. Obstet Gynecol. 1994; 83 (5pt1): 713-716. |
| [25] | Sculpher M, Manga A, Abbott J, Fountain J, Mason S, Garry R. Cost effectiveness of laparoscopic hysterectomy compares with standard hysterectomy: results of randomized trial. BMJ 2004; 328: 134-40. |
| [26] | Kovac SR, Cruikshank SH, Patwari A, O’Meara P. 28 years of using hysterectomy guidelines to determine the feasibility of vaginal hysterectomy. Gynecol Obstet. 2016; 6 (4): 1-6. |
APA Style
Andreas Chrysostomou, Innocent Maposa. (2021). Cost Analysis of Vaginal Hysterectomy as Compared to Laparoscopic Assisted Vaginal Hysterectomy for Non-prolapse Uterus in a Tertiary Institution in South Africa. Journal of Gynecology and Obstetrics, 9(6), 237-242. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.jgo.20210906.19
ACS Style
Andreas Chrysostomou; Innocent Maposa. Cost Analysis of Vaginal Hysterectomy as Compared to Laparoscopic Assisted Vaginal Hysterectomy for Non-prolapse Uterus in a Tertiary Institution in South Africa. J. Gynecol. Obstet. 2021, 9(6), 237-242. doi: 10.11648/j.jgo.20210906.19
AMA Style
Andreas Chrysostomou, Innocent Maposa. Cost Analysis of Vaginal Hysterectomy as Compared to Laparoscopic Assisted Vaginal Hysterectomy for Non-prolapse Uterus in a Tertiary Institution in South Africa. J Gynecol Obstet. 2021;9(6):237-242. doi: 10.11648/j.jgo.20210906.19
Share This Article
Twitter
Linked In
Facebook
Copy
Download@article{10.11648/j.jgo.20210906.19,
author = {Andreas Chrysostomou and Innocent Maposa},
title = {Cost Analysis of Vaginal Hysterectomy as Compared to Laparoscopic Assisted Vaginal Hysterectomy for Non-prolapse Uterus in a Tertiary Institution in South Africa},
journal = {Journal of Gynecology and Obstetrics},
volume = {9},
number = {6},
pages = {237-242},
doi = {10.11648/j.jgo.20210906.19},
url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.jgo.20210906.19},
eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.jgo.20210906.19},
abstract = {Background: Many hysterectomies are now performed by laparoscopic assisted vaginal hysterectomy (LAVH) technique. To establish LAVH as a routine procedure remains controversial, partly because of concerns about the cost. We studied hospital charges and cost of LAVH as compared to vaginal hysterectomy (VH) for non-prolapse uterus in clinically similar groups of patients. Study design: This was a cross-sectional analytic study, covering a period of two years. This study was undertaken at the Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology of the Charlotte Maxeke Johannesburg Academic Hospital (CMJAH), to determine the direct hospital costs between the two surgical techniques VH and LAVH respectively. Women admitted for hysterectomy for benign uterine conditions, were enrolled in the study. Criteria for inclusion were uterine size less than 12 weeks gestation, width ≤ 9 cm and length ≤ 14 cm on ultrasound examination. Clinical ovarian pathology and uterine prolapse were criteria for exclusion. Patients were recruited from the unit records and divided into two groups matched with respect to age, parity, and indications for hysterectomy. Vaginal hysterectomy was performed in 60 patients out of the 100 patients included in the study, and 40 patients underwent LAVH. Results: All cases were successfully performed with no need to convert to the abdominal route. The time required for LAVH was significantly longer as compared to VH: 64, 0 v 31,3 minutes respectively (pConclusion: Both techniques offer the same benefits of shorter hospital stay, less analgesia needed, rapid mobilisation, and early discharge. However, VH was found to be least costly, mainly due to significant less operative time. LAVH is significantly costlier, mainly due to expensive laparoscopic devices and afore-mentioned long operation time.},
year = {2021}
}
TY - JOUR T1 - Cost Analysis of Vaginal Hysterectomy as Compared to Laparoscopic Assisted Vaginal Hysterectomy for Non-prolapse Uterus in a Tertiary Institution in South Africa AU - Andreas Chrysostomou AU - Innocent Maposa Y1 - 2021/12/24 PY - 2021 N1 - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.jgo.20210906.19 DO - 10.11648/j.jgo.20210906.19 T2 - Journal of Gynecology and Obstetrics JF - Journal of Gynecology and Obstetrics JO - Journal of Gynecology and Obstetrics SP - 237 EP - 242 PB - Science Publishing Group SN - 2376-7820 UR - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.jgo.20210906.19 AB - Background: Many hysterectomies are now performed by laparoscopic assisted vaginal hysterectomy (LAVH) technique. To establish LAVH as a routine procedure remains controversial, partly because of concerns about the cost. We studied hospital charges and cost of LAVH as compared to vaginal hysterectomy (VH) for non-prolapse uterus in clinically similar groups of patients. Study design: This was a cross-sectional analytic study, covering a period of two years. This study was undertaken at the Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology of the Charlotte Maxeke Johannesburg Academic Hospital (CMJAH), to determine the direct hospital costs between the two surgical techniques VH and LAVH respectively. Women admitted for hysterectomy for benign uterine conditions, were enrolled in the study. Criteria for inclusion were uterine size less than 12 weeks gestation, width ≤ 9 cm and length ≤ 14 cm on ultrasound examination. Clinical ovarian pathology and uterine prolapse were criteria for exclusion. Patients were recruited from the unit records and divided into two groups matched with respect to age, parity, and indications for hysterectomy. Vaginal hysterectomy was performed in 60 patients out of the 100 patients included in the study, and 40 patients underwent LAVH. Results: All cases were successfully performed with no need to convert to the abdominal route. The time required for LAVH was significantly longer as compared to VH: 64, 0 v 31,3 minutes respectively (pConclusion: Both techniques offer the same benefits of shorter hospital stay, less analgesia needed, rapid mobilisation, and early discharge. However, VH was found to be least costly, mainly due to significant less operative time. LAVH is significantly costlier, mainly due to expensive laparoscopic devices and afore-mentioned long operation time. VL - 9 IS - 6 ER -
Information
Email: