Total Laparoscopic Hysterectomy Without a Uterine Manipulator in more than 2000 Consecutive Patients: Updated Insights from a Large Retrospective, multicenter, multinational Study
This large-scale, multinational retrospective study of 2,162 consecutive patients confirms that Total Laparoscopic Hysterectomy performed without a uterine manipulator is a safe, feasible, and reproducible technique characterized by low complication rates, short operative times, and brief hospital stays.
Original paper licensed under CC BY 4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). This is an AI-generated explanation of the paper below. It is not written or endorsed by the authors. For technical accuracy, refer to the original paper. Read full disclaimer
For decades, the removal of the uterus has been a cornerstone of gynecological surgery, offering relief from conditions ranging from painful bleeding to large, benign growths. While this operation can be performed through a large abdominal incision, modern medicine has largely shifted toward minimally invasive approaches, where surgeons work through tiny keyhole incisions using long instruments and a camera. This laparoscopic method offers patients less pain, faster recovery, and shorter hospital stays compared to traditional open surgery. A standard part of this procedure usually involves inserting a specialized tool into the vagina to hold and move the uterus, giving the surgeon better visibility and control. However, recent years have brought a re-evaluation of this tool, particularly regarding concerns that manipulating the uterus in certain ways might carry hidden risks or affect healing. This has sparked a quiet but significant shift in surgical philosophy: can the operation be performed safely and effectively without ever using this internal holding device?
A team of surgeons from Greece and Cyprus set out to answer this question with a massive, real-world test. They looked back at the records of more than two thousand consecutive women who underwent a total laparoscopic hysterectomy without the use of a uterine manipulator. This was not a small pilot study or a theoretical exercise; it was a review of over twenty-one hundred actual operations performed over fifteen years by a single, experienced surgical team. The goal was to see if removing the uterus without that internal tool was safe, how long the surgeries took, and whether patients recovered well. The researchers focused on a diverse group of women, most in their early fifties, with a mix of body types and medical histories, many of whom had previous abdominal surgeries or large uteruses that made the operation technically challenging.
The results of this extensive review were striking in their consistency. The surgeons found that performing the operation without the manipulator was not only possible but highly efficient. On average, the entire procedure took just over an hour and fifteen minutes, a timeframe that compares favorably with standard techniques that do use the tool. The amount of blood lost during surgery was minimal, averaging only about fifty-four milliliters, which is roughly the volume of a small juice glass. In the vast majority of cases, the surgery proceeded without the need to convert to a large open incision; only three women out of the entire group of two thousand required such a change due to unexpected bleeding. Furthermore, the need for blood transfusions was rare, occurring in just over one percent of patients.
Safety was the primary concern for anyone questioning this approach, particularly regarding damage to nearby organs like the ureters, the tubes that carry urine from the kidneys to the bladder. The study found that injuries to these structures were exceptionally rare, occurring in only one patient out of the entire series. Similarly, injuries to the bladder happened in just four cases. Crucially, every single complication was identified and fixed while the surgeons were still operating, meaning no patient suffered from an undetected injury after leaving the room. The recovery times were equally impressive. Most women left the hospital within a day and a half, with the vast majority staying less than two days. Complications after surgery, such as infections or issues with the vaginal cuff where the uterus was removed, were uncommon and occurred at rates lower than or equal to those seen in other large studies of laparoscopic hysterectomy.
One of the most notable findings concerned the healing of the vaginal top, known as the vault. Because the surgeons used scissors to make the initial cut rather than heat-generating tools, they avoided causing thermal damage to the tissue. This approach appeared to help the tissue heal more robustly, with a very low rate of the surgical site reopening, a complication that can be serious. The researchers noted that this technique required a high level of skill and precise hand movements, as the surgeons had to manually guide the uterus with instruments rather than relying on a tool to hold it in place. They emphasized that while the method is safe, it demands that the surgeon be well-trained and have completed a sufficient number of supervised procedures to master the necessary spatial awareness.
The study concludes that removing the uterus without a manipulator is a feasible, safe, and reproducible technique that offers excellent outcomes for patients. It suggests that the fears regarding safety and organ injury are unfounded when the procedure is performed by experienced hands using a standardized method. By avoiding the internal tool, surgeons may actually reduce certain risks and improve healing, all while keeping the operation time short and the hospital stay minimal. This large body of evidence provides a strong foundation for gynecologists to consider this approach, not just for routine cases but potentially as a training ground for even more complex surgeries, proving that sometimes, the most effective way forward is to rely on skill and precision rather than additional equipment.
Drowning in papers in your field?
Get daily digests of the most novel papers matching your research keywords — with technical summaries, in your language.