**New Approaches to Hysterectomy by Minimal Invasive Surgery (MIS)**

Shanti Raju-Kankipati and Omer Devaja *University of London, United Kingdom*

## **1. Introduction**

74 Hysterectomy

Nout, RA.; Smit, VT. & Putter, H. et al. (2010). Vaginal Brachytherapy versus Pelvic External

Randall, ME.; Filiaci, VL. & Muss, H. et al. (2006). Randomized phase III trial of whole-

Randall, ME.; Michael, H. Long III, H. & Tedjanati, S. (2009). Uterine Cervix, In: *Principles* 

Vol.375, Issue 9717, (March 2010), pp. 816-823, ISSN 0140-6736

(Eds), 623-681, ISBN: 978-0781778459, Philadelphia, USA

(Jan 2006), pp.36-44, ISSN:0732-183X

Beam Radiotherapy for Patients with Endometrial Cancer of High-intermediate Risk (PORTEC-2): An Open-label, Non-inferiority, Randomised Trial. *Lancet*,

abdominal irradiation versus doxorubicin and cisplatin chemotherapy in advanced endometrial carcinoma: a Gynecologic Oncology Group Study. *J Clin Oncol*, Vol. 24,

*and Practice of Gynecologic Oncology*, R.R.Barakat,, M. Markman & M.E. Randall

The most significant advancement in in reducing surgical morbidity in gynaecology over the last two decades has been an increased application of minimal invasive surgical techniques for both benign and malignant gynaecological disease requiring a subtotal, simple, or radical hysterectomy. 1,2,3,4,5,6.

Many variations of the procedures of laparoscopic assisted hysterectomy have been described, that vary principally by the extent of surgery performed via the laparoscopic route. The training and skill of the surgeon and equipment available may influence the extent of surgery performed via the laparoscope. This in turn has the potential impact on the clinical outcomes, such as perioperative complication rate and resource utilization outcomes such as readmission rate and post-surgical care.

Several attempts have been made to standardize the extent of surgery by minimal access approach by using a system of classification 7,8. Unfortunately the clinical results published on this topic, in the literature seldom adhere to these classifications when describing their outcomes. The reluctance to adhere to these classifications may be due to the complexity of the classifications, with numerous subgroups in each type of the main four Types described by AAGL. Besides, this classification does not extend to more radical hysterectomies required for malignant conditions such as endometrial and cervical cancers.

Simplifying the classification described by AAGL for both subtotal and total hysterectomies by MIS and extending the classification to include pelvic and Para aortic lymphadenectomy and Piver's 9 classification of radical hysterectomy may be more useful to standardize and compare surgical outcomes by MIS in future. It is essential that surgeons have advanced laparoscopic skill recognised by their national or international governing body for training, before undertaking these procedures in the interest of their patients. The National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) of U.K. has recently issued the guidance on laparoscopic radical hysterectomy for early cervical cancer and emphasised the importance of adequate higher training in MIS for surgeons undertaking these procedures. (2010)10.

New Approaches to Hysterectomy by Minimal Invasive Surgery (MIS) 77

The camera consists of two high definition units which recreate a true 3D colour image which is viewed by the surgeon at the console. The camera allows for up to 12 x magnification of the operating field, opening up the possibility of performing microsurgical procedures as well as spotting and managing small blood vessels to reduce bleeding and performing nerve sparing surgical dissection (fig 4). Three cameras are available for use on the de Vinci system, one straight and two angled cameras (up and down pointed), which allows the surgeon the options of viewing all nooks and corners of the pelvis and abdomen.

Fig. 1. da Vinci robot

Fig. 2. Console

Fig. 3. 3D optics

## **2. Laparoscopic assisted hysterectomy for benign gynaecological disease**

In the past two decades there has been a vast number of publications on laparoscopic hysterectomy: prospective, retrospective, randomised studies and met-analysis evaluating the complications, benefits to patients, cost to health services and quality of life. There are equal numbers of proponents of this surgical technique as there are for conventional hysterectomy by laparotomy and vaginal hysterectomy. The complication rates reported in earlier multicentre studies showed a higher complication rate 2, 11,12, 13 similar rates 3, 14, and lower complications with laparoscopic approach 15.

## **3. Laparoscopic hysterectomy with pelvic lymphadenectomy**

Childers and Surwit proposed laparoscopic staging as an alternative for early endometrial cancer 16. Several studies since have shown that this approach is associated with a shorter hospitalisation, faster recovery, lower complications when compared to open surgery. 5, 17, 18. Meta analysis of 17 prospective and retrospective studies showed that laparoscopic approach to surgical treatment for women with endometrial cancer had lower complications and no significant difference in recurrent rates or disease free survival 19,20.

## **4. Laparoscopic radical hysterectomy with pelvic lymphadenectomy**

Over a thousand laparoscopic radical hysterectomies have been performed to-date, 21,22,23,24. However, laparoscopic surgery has not gained popularity amongst gynaecological oncologists. Many gynaecologists have been slow to adopt laparoscopic approach to radical hysterectomy largely due to prolonged learning curve, complexity of the procedure, technical challenges leading to prolonged operating time and surgeon's fatigue. The disadvantages of the laparoscopic approach which includes, two dimensional view, decreased range of movements, reduced degree of freedom of instruments and dependents on the skill of assistants. Wattiez et al 25 in a series of 1,647 cases showed the learning curve for total laparoscopic hysterectomy is prolonged and the technique requires a high level of expertise and training as recommended by NICE 10. The complications with laparoscopic hysterectomy have been reported to be higher when performed by less experienced surgeons. Although patients treated with laparoscopic approach have been shown to experience less intraoperative blood loss, less post-operative pain and ileus, and short hospital stay than those who had conventional open hysterectomy 26, minimal invasive surgery (MIS) is still an exception and not the rule in most gynaecologist practice.

## **5. Surgical robot – de Vinci surgical system (intuitive surgical inc.)** (Fig 1.)

This robotic system was introduced in 1999 which is comprised of three components, the patient side surgical cart, the vision system, and the surgical console (fig 2). The surgeon's console is located remotely from the patient. The surgeon is seated at the console to control the robotic arms which hold the instruments within the patient's abdomen. With the aid of stereoscopic viewer, hand manipulators and foot pedals, the surgeon is able to conduct the surgery with greater precision and ease. The second component is the de Vinci 3D optics which consists of a sophisticated stereoscopic digital camera through a 12 mm endoscope (fig 3).

Fig. 1. da Vinci robot

76 Hysterectomy

Childers and Surwit proposed laparoscopic staging as an alternative for early endometrial cancer 16. Several studies since have shown that this approach is associated with a shorter hospitalisation, faster recovery, lower complications when compared to open surgery. 5, 17, 18. Meta analysis of 17 prospective and retrospective studies showed that laparoscopic approach to surgical treatment for women with endometrial cancer had lower complications

Over a thousand laparoscopic radical hysterectomies have been performed to-date, 21,22,23,24. However, laparoscopic surgery has not gained popularity amongst gynaecological oncologists. Many gynaecologists have been slow to adopt laparoscopic approach to radical hysterectomy largely due to prolonged learning curve, complexity of the procedure, technical challenges leading to prolonged operating time and surgeon's fatigue. The disadvantages of the laparoscopic approach which includes, two dimensional view, decreased range of movements, reduced degree of freedom of instruments and dependents on the skill of assistants. Wattiez et al 25 in a series of 1,647 cases showed the learning curve for total laparoscopic hysterectomy is prolonged and the technique requires a high level of expertise and training as recommended by NICE 10. The complications with laparoscopic hysterectomy have been reported to be higher when performed by less experienced surgeons. Although patients treated with laparoscopic approach have been shown to experience less intraoperative blood loss, less post-operative pain and ileus, and short hospital stay than those who had conventional open hysterectomy 26, minimal invasive

**2. Laparoscopic assisted hysterectomy for benign gynaecological disease**  In the past two decades there has been a vast number of publications on laparoscopic hysterectomy: prospective, retrospective, randomised studies and met-analysis evaluating the complications, benefits to patients, cost to health services and quality of life. There are equal numbers of proponents of this surgical technique as there are for conventional hysterectomy by laparotomy and vaginal hysterectomy. The complication rates reported in earlier multicentre studies showed a higher complication rate 2, 11,12, 13 similar rates 3, 14, and

lower complications with laparoscopic approach 15.

**3. Laparoscopic hysterectomy with pelvic lymphadenectomy** 

and no significant difference in recurrent rates or disease free survival 19,20.

**4. Laparoscopic radical hysterectomy with pelvic lymphadenectomy** 

surgery (MIS) is still an exception and not the rule in most gynaecologist practice.

**5. Surgical robot – de Vinci surgical system (intuitive surgical inc.)** (Fig 1.)

This robotic system was introduced in 1999 which is comprised of three components, the patient side surgical cart, the vision system, and the surgical console (fig 2). The surgeon's console is located remotely from the patient. The surgeon is seated at the console to control the robotic arms which hold the instruments within the patient's abdomen. With the aid of stereoscopic viewer, hand manipulators and foot pedals, the surgeon is able to conduct the surgery with greater precision and ease. The second component is the de Vinci 3D optics which consists of a sophisticated stereoscopic digital camera through a 12 mm endoscope (fig 3).

Fig. 2. Console

Fig. 3. 3D optics

The camera consists of two high definition units which recreate a true 3D colour image which is viewed by the surgeon at the console. The camera allows for up to 12 x magnification of the operating field, opening up the possibility of performing microsurgical procedures as well as spotting and managing small blood vessels to reduce bleeding and performing nerve sparing surgical dissection (fig 4). Three cameras are available for use on the de Vinci system, one straight and two angled cameras (up and down pointed), which allows the surgeon the options of viewing all nooks and corners of the pelvis and abdomen.

New Approaches to Hysterectomy by Minimal Invasive Surgery (MIS) 79

Ligasure) for vessel sealing as described earlier 27. There has been an increase in the use of robotic assisted technique over laparoscopic approach for minimal invasive surgery and hysterectomy in the past five years in the United states . This popularity of robotic approach may be attributed to greater degrees of freedom of movement, 3D viewing and ease of intracorporal suturing and less steep learning curve when compared to laparoscopic approach. Laparoscopic hysterectomy has been shown to have a longer operative time compared to robotic surgery, with comparable blood loss, length of hospital stay and post-operative complications 28. Others have shown that robotic surgery has a lower operating time when compared to laparoscopic surgery and decreased hospital stay, less blood loss and lower

**7. Robotic assisted hysterectomy & radical hysterectomy with pelvic +/- para-**

Patients with endometrial cancer often are obese, elderly with increased incidents of medical comorbidities including diabetes and cardiovascular disease. The advantages of laparoscopic minimal invasive surgery in women with endometrial cancer have been shown by several studies, in the reduction of hospital stay, quicker recovery, lower incidents of

Since 2005 the use of robotic assisted MIS has gained popularity in gynaecological oncology. Robotic assisted surgery offers 3D, high definition visualisation in a stable field, more

Unlike laparoscopic technique, once the patient is docked to the robot, the Trendelenburg position cannot be reversed without undocking the patient. At 30 degrees steep Trendelenburg position, there is a hypothetical risk of higher inspiratory pressure due to reduced ventilatory compliance which may compromise the advantages of MIS in obese and elderly women, which is frequently to co-morbidity in women with endometrial cancer. However, studies this far have not shown any increased risk using robotic assisted surgery in these high risk women with endometrial cancer, when compared to laparoscopic or open surgery. Table 1 shows comparison between open laparoscopic and robotic surgery in women with endometrial cancer 36, 39,40,41. The rate of conversion to laparotomy has been reported between 3% to 16%, 36, 37, 38. Older women had lower risk of surgical complications with laparoscopic vaginal approach 43, 44 yet implementation of laparoscopic surgery in these patients is low. In a prospective study Vakin et al showed that using robotic assisted technique in elderly patients with endometrial cancer had similar overall outcomes when compared with younger patients with endometrial cancer, despite having significantly more co-morbidities and more advanced disease 38. Quality of life and patient satisfaction have shown to be superior with robotic assisted approach 38, which could be due to lower post-

In 2006 Sert et al 45 described the first robotic assisted radical hysterectomy for early stage cervical cancer (stage IB1). They performed type III robotic assisted radical hysterectomy with estimated blood loss of 200 ml with no intra-operative or post-operative complications. The patient was discharged home four days later. Over the past five years several reports have been published on the robotic assisted radical hysterectomy 46,47,48,49,50. Table II shows

**aortic lymphadenectomy in gynaecological oncology** 

thromboembolic complications and post-operative infections 5,30,31,32,33.

operative pain hence reduce intake of narcotic analgesics.

intuitive instrument control, better ergonomics and increased dexterity 4,34,35.

conversion to open surgery 29.

Fig. 4. Products

The third component is the surgical cart which is composed of three to four arms for controlling the 3D camera and two to three surgical instruments. The robotic instruments are "wristed", thereby providing 7 degrees of freedom (*df)* compared with 4 *df* with traditional laparoscopy (fig 5). The robotic instruments are controlled by the principal surgeon who sits away from the patient at the surgical console via two "masters". The movements of the surgeon's arms and legs are translating in real time to the robotic instruments inside the patient's abdomen and are processed and scaled to reduce any tremor and thus enhance precision of movements and avoid tissue trauma.

Fig. 5. Instruments

The surgical instruments and a stereoscopic video camera all work in unison during surgery. The hand-like surgical instruments move with 7 (df) and two degrees of axial rotation (fig 5). The surgical masters are placed in line with the surgeon's field of vision in order to restore a more intuitive eye-hand coordination than that experienced with traditional laparoscopy. The foot controlled pedals on the surgical console enable the surgeon to control and zoom the camera which gives complete control over the surgical field, unlike the traditional laparoscopy where the surgeon relies on the assistant to control the camera.

## **6. Robotic-assisted total hysterectomy technique**

The steps of surgical technique are similar to those in an open or laparoscopic surgical approach, which include careful preparation of the vascular pedicles prior to ligation by bipolar, mono-polar energy sources or other energy sources (Harmonic scalpel, En seal,

The third component is the surgical cart which is composed of three to four arms for controlling the 3D camera and two to three surgical instruments. The robotic instruments are "wristed", thereby providing 7 degrees of freedom (*df)* compared with 4 *df* with traditional laparoscopy (fig 5). The robotic instruments are controlled by the principal surgeon who sits away from the patient at the surgical console via two "masters". The movements of the surgeon's arms and legs are translating in real time to the robotic instruments inside the patient's abdomen and are processed and scaled to reduce any

The surgical instruments and a stereoscopic video camera all work in unison during surgery. The hand-like surgical instruments move with 7 (df) and two degrees of axial rotation (fig 5). The surgical masters are placed in line with the surgeon's field of vision in order to restore a more intuitive eye-hand coordination than that experienced with traditional laparoscopy. The foot controlled pedals on the surgical console enable the surgeon to control and zoom the camera which gives complete control over the surgical field, unlike the traditional laparoscopy where the surgeon relies on the assistant to control

The steps of surgical technique are similar to those in an open or laparoscopic surgical approach, which include careful preparation of the vascular pedicles prior to ligation by bipolar, mono-polar energy sources or other energy sources (Harmonic scalpel, En seal,

tremor and thus enhance precision of movements and avoid tissue trauma.

**6. Robotic-assisted total hysterectomy technique** 

Fig. 4. Products

Fig. 5. Instruments

the camera.

Ligasure) for vessel sealing as described earlier 27. There has been an increase in the use of robotic assisted technique over laparoscopic approach for minimal invasive surgery and hysterectomy in the past five years in the United states . This popularity of robotic approach may be attributed to greater degrees of freedom of movement, 3D viewing and ease of intracorporal suturing and less steep learning curve when compared to laparoscopic approach. Laparoscopic hysterectomy has been shown to have a longer operative time compared to robotic surgery, with comparable blood loss, length of hospital stay and post-operative complications 28. Others have shown that robotic surgery has a lower operating time when compared to laparoscopic surgery and decreased hospital stay, less blood loss and lower conversion to open surgery 29.

## **7. Robotic assisted hysterectomy & radical hysterectomy with pelvic +/- paraaortic lymphadenectomy in gynaecological oncology**

Patients with endometrial cancer often are obese, elderly with increased incidents of medical comorbidities including diabetes and cardiovascular disease. The advantages of laparoscopic minimal invasive surgery in women with endometrial cancer have been shown by several studies, in the reduction of hospital stay, quicker recovery, lower incidents of thromboembolic complications and post-operative infections 5,30,31,32,33.

Since 2005 the use of robotic assisted MIS has gained popularity in gynaecological oncology. Robotic assisted surgery offers 3D, high definition visualisation in a stable field, more intuitive instrument control, better ergonomics and increased dexterity 4,34,35.

Unlike laparoscopic technique, once the patient is docked to the robot, the Trendelenburg position cannot be reversed without undocking the patient. At 30 degrees steep Trendelenburg position, there is a hypothetical risk of higher inspiratory pressure due to reduced ventilatory compliance which may compromise the advantages of MIS in obese and elderly women, which is frequently to co-morbidity in women with endometrial cancer. However, studies this far have not shown any increased risk using robotic assisted surgery in these high risk women with endometrial cancer, when compared to laparoscopic or open surgery. Table 1 shows comparison between open laparoscopic and robotic surgery in women with endometrial cancer 36, 39,40,41. The rate of conversion to laparotomy has been reported between 3% to 16%, 36, 37, 38. Older women had lower risk of surgical complications with laparoscopic vaginal approach 43, 44 yet implementation of laparoscopic surgery in these patients is low. In a prospective study Vakin et al showed that using robotic assisted technique in elderly patients with endometrial cancer had similar overall outcomes when compared with younger patients with endometrial cancer, despite having significantly more co-morbidities and more advanced disease 38. Quality of life and patient satisfaction have shown to be superior with robotic assisted approach 38, which could be due to lower postoperative pain hence reduce intake of narcotic analgesics.

In 2006 Sert et al 45 described the first robotic assisted radical hysterectomy for early stage cervical cancer (stage IB1). They performed type III robotic assisted radical hysterectomy with estimated blood loss of 200 ml with no intra-operative or post-operative complications. The patient was discharged home four days later. Over the past five years several reports have been published on the robotic assisted radical hysterectomy 46,47,48,49,50. Table II shows

New Approaches to Hysterectomy by Minimal Invasive Surgery (MIS) 81

is still necessary. The intra-operative and post-operative morbidity of robotic assisted total hysterectomy are similar or sometimes less than those reported following open and

To date, there are no randomised trials comparing the robotic assisted approach to radical hysterectomy, laparoscopy and laparotomy. There is an on-going phase III randomised clinical trial comparing the three techniques of radical hysterectomy in women with early stage cervical cancer, developed and designed by the Gynaecology Oncology Committee from American Association of Gynaecologic Laparoscopists 51. The outcome of this trial may

The potential for robotic assisted surgical devices to revolutionize complex surgery by reducing surgical morbidity, improving quality of life, minimising hospital stay which in

Minimal invasive surgery ,both laparoscopic and roboticassissted surgery are alternative techniques to conventional open hysterectomy. However the training required to use these techniques, is an important factor to minimize complications during surgery. The reduced hospital stay., quicker recovery and increased patient satisfaction with these new approaches makes minimal invasive surgery certainly a viable challenge to conventional

[1] Raju KS, Auld BJ, A randomised prospective study of laparoscopic vaginal hysterectomy

[2] Garry R, Fountain. J. Mason. S, Hawe . J, Napp. V. et al . The eVALuate study: two

[3] Donnez O, Donnez J. A series of 400 laparoscopic hysterectomies for benign disease: a

[4] Boggess JF. Robotic surgery in gynaecologic oncology: evolution of a new surgical

[5] Devaja. O., Samara I., Papadopoulos AJ. Laparoscopically assisted vaginal hysterectomy

[6] Raju-Kankipati. S, Papadopoulos. AJ.,Khan. MS.,Dasgupta. P. A pilot study to assess the

[7] Munro mg, Parker WH . Classification of laparoscopic hysterectomy . Obtet. Gynecol.

Prospective cohort study. Int. J. Gynae. Cancer (2010) 20, 4, 570-575

Salpingo- oophorectomy. J. Robotic Surg. (2010) 4: 41-44.

versus abdominal hysterectomy each with, bilateral Salpingo oophorectomy. Brit.

parallel randomised trials, one comparing laparoscopic with abdominal hysterectomy, the other comparing laparoscopic with vaginal hysterectomy. BMJ

single centre, single surgeon prospective study of complications confirming previous retrospective study. Brit. Jour. Obstet. Gynaecol (2010), 117 (6). 752-

(LAVH) versus Total abdominal hysterectomy (TAH) in Endometrial carcinoma:

feasibility, safety and cost of robotic assisted total hysterectomy and bilateral

turn reduced costs to the Health Service, is a high possibility in the near future.

shed more light on the future approach to radical hysterectomy.

Jour. Obtet. Gynae. (1994) 101: 1068-1071.

paradigm. J. Robotic Surg. (2007) 1: 31-37.

(2004), 328: 1229-1236.

(1993) 82, 624-629.

laparoscopic hysterectomies.

**8. Conclusions** 

hysterectomy.

**9. References** 

755.


(R = robotic, L = laparoscopic, A = abdominal surgery, LN = Lymph nodes)

Table 1. Outcomes of robotics hysterectomy and pelvic lymphadenectomy


Table 2. Outcomes of Robotic Radical Hysterectomy

some of the reported series with their outcomes. Although the recurrence rates seem to be equivalent to those after laparotomy and laparoscopic hysterectomies, long term follow up is still necessary. The intra-operative and post-operative morbidity of robotic assisted total hysterectomy are similar or sometimes less than those reported following open and laparoscopic hysterectomies.

To date, there are no randomised trials comparing the robotic assisted approach to radical hysterectomy, laparoscopy and laparotomy. There is an on-going phase III randomised clinical trial comparing the three techniques of radical hysterectomy in women with early stage cervical cancer, developed and designed by the Gynaecology Oncology Committee from American Association of Gynaecologic Laparoscopists 51. The outcome of this trial may shed more light on the future approach to radical hysterectomy.

The potential for robotic assisted surgical devices to revolutionize complex surgery by reducing surgical morbidity, improving quality of life, minimising hospital stay which in turn reduced costs to the Health Service, is a high possibility in the near future.

## **8. Conclusions**

80 Hysterectomy

Jung et al

R > L R=L=A R=L>A A<R<L

Lymph node(mean)

> 25 (median)

> 29 (median)

some of the reported series with their outcomes. Although the recurrence rates seem to be equivalent to those after laparotomy and laparoscopic hysterectomies, long term follow up

(median) -

Bell et al

Hosp. Stay (days)

> 1 (median)

> 1 (median)

Boggess et al

(Conversion: R=L)

Complications

Nerve injury (2) Bowel injury (1) Transfusion (3) Vaginal dehiscence (3)

Hernia (1) Recurrence (5) DOD (1)

Conversion (1) Ureteric injury (1) Bladder injury (1) Infection (3) DVT (1)

Vaginal dehiscence (5) Pelvic abscess (7) Lymphoedema (13) Ureteric stenosis (1) Nerve injury (9) Hernia (3) DVT (2)

Vaginal dehiscence (1) Nodal metastases (5) Positive margins (1) Recurrence (1)

(2008) (N=322)

(2008) (N=110)

(2010) (N=109)

Blood Loss R < L R=L<A R=L<A R< L or A LN Yield R = L R=A>L R=L=A R> L or A

Hospital Stay - R=L<A R=L<A R< L or A Complication rate R = L R=L<A R<A<L R<L

(R = robotic, L = laparoscopic, A = abdominal surgery, LN = Lymph nodes)

Op. Time Blood loss

Maggioni 40 272 78 20.4 3.7

Table 1. Outcomes of robotics hysterectomy and pelvic lymphadenectomy

(ml)

50 (median)

50 (median)

Cardenas et al

(2010) (N=257)

Author

No of patients

Study No of

cases

Lowe 42 <sup>215</sup>

Canterell 63 <sup>213</sup>

(median)

Persson 64 262 150 <sup>26</sup>

(median)

Table 2. Outcomes of Robotic Radical Hysterectomy

Operating Time

Year

Minimal invasive surgery ,both laparoscopic and roboticassissted surgery are alternative techniques to conventional open hysterectomy. However the training required to use these techniques, is an important factor to minimize complications during surgery. The reduced hospital stay., quicker recovery and increased patient satisfaction with these new approaches makes minimal invasive surgery certainly a viable challenge to conventional hysterectomy.

## **9. References**


New Approaches to Hysterectomy by Minimal Invasive Surgery (MIS) 83

[24] Malzoni M., Tinelli R., Cosentino F., Fusco A., Malzoni C. Total laparoscopic radical

[25] Wattiez A., Soriano D., Cohen SB., Nervo P., Canis M. et.al. The learning curve of total

[26] Aboud L., Boggess J. Current application of laparoscopy in gynaecologic oncology: a

[27] Dasgupta p. (ED). U ROLOGIC ROBOTIC SURGERY IN CLINICAL PRACTICE.

[28] Nezhat C. Lavie O., Lemyre M., Gemer O., Bhagan L., Nezhat C . L aparoscopic

[29] Payne TN., Dauterive FR. A comparison of total laparoscopic hysterectomy to

[30] Kalegiannidis I., Lambrechts S., Amout F., Neven P., Van Gorp T., Vergote I.

[31] Malzoni M., Tinelli R., Cosentino F., Perone C., Raste M. et.al. Total laparoscopic

[32] Zullo F., Palombo S., Falbo A., Russo T., Mocciaro R. et al. Laparoscopic surgery vs

[33] Cho YH., Kim DY., Kim JH., Kim YM., Kim YT., Nam JH. Laparoscopic management of

[34] Reynolds RK., Burke WM., Advincula AP. Preliminary experience with robot-assisted laparoscopic staging of gynaecological malignancies. J.S.L.S. (2005) 9:149-158. [35] Field JB., Benoit MF., Dinh TA et. Al. Computer-enhanced robotic surgery in

[36] Boggess JF., Gehrig PA., Cantrell L et.al. A comparative study of 3 surgical methods for

[37] Seamon LG., Cohen DE., Henretta MS. et.al. Minimally invasive comprehensive

[38] Vaknin Z., Perri T., Lau S., Deland C., Drummond N. et.al. Outcome and Quality of life

focus on elderly patients. Int. J. Gynecol. Cancer. (2010) 20: 1367-1373. [39] Cardenas- GOICOECHEA J., Adams S., Bhat SB., Randall TC. Surgical outcomes of

literature review . Womens Oncol. Rev. (2005) 5 (4) 193-201.

1316-1323.

Gynecol. Lap. (2002) 9: 339-345.

Springer. London pp. 159-180.

Minim. Inv.Gynecol. (2008) 15 (3) 286-291.

term outcome. AM. J. Obstet. Gynecol . (2007) 196- e8

controlled trials. Am J. Obstet. Gynecol.(2009) 200: 296-e9.

gynaecologic oncology . Surg. Endsc. (2007) 2444-246.

Laparotomy. Am. J. Obstet.Gynecol. (2008) 199: 360 el-360 e9.

Surg. (2009) 13 (2) 125-128.

(2007) 106: 585-590.

(2009) 113: 36-41.

hysterectomy versus abdominal radical hysterectomy with lymphadenectomy in patients with early cervical cancer: our experience. Ann. Surg. Oncol. (2009) 16 (5)

laparoscopic hysterectomy comparative analysis of 1647 cases. J. Am. Assoc.

hysterectomy with and without a robot: Stanford experience. J.Soc. Laparo endosc.

robotically assisted hysterectomy: surgical outcomes in a communitypractice. J.

Laparoscopy assisted vaginal hysterectomy compared with abdominal hysterectomy in clinical Stage I endometrial cancer: safety,recurrence and long-

hysterectomy versus abdominal hysterectomy with lymphadenectomy for early stage endometrial cancer: a prospective study. Gynecol. Oncol. (2009) 112, 126-13.

laparotomy for early stage endometrial cancer: long term data of randomised

early uterine cancer: 10 year experience in Asan Medical Centre Gynecol. Oncol.

hysterectomy with staging for endometrial cancer: robotic assistance, laparoscopiy.

surgical staging for endometrial cancer. Robotics or laparoscopy ? Gynecol. Oncol.

in a prospective cohort of the first 100 robotic surgery for endometrial cancer, with

robotic-assisted surgical staging for endometrial cancer are equivalent to traditional


[8] Olive. DL, Parker WH, Cooper JM., Levine RL. The AAGL Classification System for Laparoscopic Hysterectomy. Jour. Amer. Assoc. Gynecol. Lap. (2000) 7 (1), 9-15.

[10] National Institute of Health and Clinical Excellence. Laparoscopic radical

[11] Johnson N., Barlow D., Lethaby. A., Tavender E., Curr l., Garry R. Methods of

[12] Johnson N.,Barlow D., Lethaby A., Tavender E., Curr l., Garry R. Surgical approach to

[13] Maresh MJ., Metcalfe MA., McPherson K. et al. The Value national hysterectomy study

[14] Donnez O., Jadoul P., Squifflet J., Donnez J. A series of 3190 laparoscopic

[15] Karaman Y., Bingol M., Gunenc Z. Prevention of complications in laparoscopic

[16] Childers JM., Surwit EA. Combined laparoscopic and vaginal surgery for the

[17] Kim. DY., Kim MU., Kim JH., Suh DS. et. al. Laparoscopic assisted vaginal

[18] Eltabbakh GH., Shamanki MI., Garafano LL. Laparoscopy as the primary modality of treatment of women with endometrial cancer. Cancer (2001) 91: 378-387. [19] Palombo S., Falbo A., Mocciaro R., Russo T., Zulla F. Laparoscopic treatment for

[20] Ju W., Myung SK., Kim Y., Choi HJ., Kim SC. Comparison of laparoscopy and

[21] Canis M., Mage G ., Wattiez A. Pouly JL. et.al. Does endoscopic surgery have a role in

[22] Nezhat CR., Burrell MO., Nezhat FR., Benigno BB. Welander CE. Laparoscopc radical

[23] Frumovitz M. dos Reis R., Sun CC., Milam MR. et.al. Comparison of total laparoscopic

endometrial cancer Int. J. Gynecol. Cancer. (2005) 15: 932-937.

hysterectomy for early cervical cancer. (2010). Interventional procedure guidance.

hysterectomy systematic review and met-analysis of randomised controlled trials

hysterectomy for benign gynaecological disease. Cochrane Database Sys. Rev.

description of the patients and their surgery . Brit. Jour. Obstet. Gynae. (2002) 109:

hysterectomies for benign disease from 1990 to 2006: evaluation of complications compared with vaginal and abdominal procedures. Brit. Jour. Obstet . Gynae.

hysterectomy: experience with 1120 cases performed by a single surgeon. J. Minim.

management of two cases of Stage I endometrial cancer. Gynecol. Oncol (1992) 45:

hysterectomy versus abdominal hysterectomy in patients with Stage I and II

endometrial cancer: a meta- analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCT s)

laparotomy for management of endometrial carcinoma ; a meta- analysis. Int. J.

radical surgery of cancer of cervix uteri? J. Gynecol Obstet. Biol. Reprod. (Paris)

hysterectomy with para-aortic and pelvic node dissection. Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol

and abdominal radical hysterectomy for patients with early-stage cervical cancer.

[9] Piver Classification for Radical Hysterectomy (1974) PMID 4417035.

24.

302-312.

46-51.

BMJ. (2005) 330; 1478

(2006) 2: CD 00 3677.

(2009) 116; 492-500.

Inv. Gynecol. (2007) 14: 78-84.

Gynecol. Oncol. (2009) 112: 415-421.

Gynecol Cancer. (2009) 19 ; 400-406.

Obstet. Gynecol. (2007) 110 (10 96-102.

(1990) 19 (7) 921.

(1992) 166 (3) 864-865.


**1. Introduction** 

developed countries.

**1.1 Emergency Peripartum Hysterectomy** 

**6**

*Nigeria* 

Abiodun Omole-Ohonsi

*Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology,* 

**Emergency Peripartum Hysterectomy** 

The most common indication for emergency peripartum hysterectomy is severe uterine hemorrhage, which cannot be controlled by conservative measures. Such hemorrhage may be due to abnormal placentation (eg, placenta praevia and placenta praevia accreta), uterine atony, uterine rupture, leiomyomas, coagulopathy, over distension of the uterus (multiple pregnancy, polyhdramnios), or laceration of the uterine vessel(s), which is not treatable by conservative measures. The relative frequency of these conditions varies among series, and is dependent upon the patient's population and practice patterns. Emergency peripartum hysterectomy is a life saving surgical procedure, which is usually carried out for postpartum haemorrhage, after a sequence of interventions are not successful. Advent of newer medical /conservative surgical methods of controlling postpartum haemorrhage, have reduced the incidence and indications of emergency peripartum hysterectomy. Sophistication in obstetric care and blood transfusion services has improved the outcome, especially in

Emergency hysterectomy refers to the surgical removal of the uterus, following an unexpected and sudden event that must be dealt with urgently by carrying out the procedure. When it is carried out on a pregnant uterus within 24 hours after delivery, it is termed emergency peripartum hysterectomy. This life saving obstetric procedure has been in use for more than 200 years, but it was in 1876 that Edward Porro published the first

In developing countries, a variable incidence of 2 to 6 per 1000 births has been reported, compared to 0.2 to 2.7 per 1000 births from developed countries. In Nigeria, the incidence of emergency peripartum hysterectomy ranges from 1.8 to 5.4 per 1000 births. In Pakistan, an incidence of 5.6 per 1000 births was reported, in India 2.6 per 1000 births, and in the United States of America (USA) 1.2 to 2.7 per 1000 births. Lower incidence was reported in European countries like Norway, where 0.2 per 1000 births was reported, in Ireland and

The increasing incidence of the procedure in developed countries like USA and Canada, despite proper utilization of effective antenatal and delivery facilities, has been attributed to the increasing caesarean section rate, which predisposes to placenta praevia and placenta praevia accreta, which are now the leading indications for emergency peripartum

successful case report of this procedure, in which the mother and baby survived.

Netherlands 0.3 per 1000 births was reported from both countries.

*Bayero University/Aminu Kano Teaching Hospital, Kano,* 

laparoscopic assisted staging at a minimal invasive surgical centre. Gynecol. Oncol. (2010) 117: 224-228.

