BACKGROUND: Vaginal hysterectomy (VH) rate is declining despite being considered as the optimal minimally invasive option for hysterectomy with reduced operative time and length of stay compared with laparoscopic hysterectomy (LH). Vaginal assisted natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery hysterectomy (VANH) combines the advantages of both vaginal and endoscopic approach to surgery. AIMS: To report feasibility and early experience of a single surgeon adopting VANH at a tertiary Australian hospital. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Prospective review of the first 20 VANH cases with complete data set collected retrospectively including patient demographics, indication for surgery and perioperative outcomes. RESULTS: The median age of the first 20 participants was 51.5 years (47-57 years of age) and the median body mass index was 33.5 kg/m (27.8-38.3 kg/m). The predominant indication was complex hyperplasia with atypia (12/20, 60%). The median parity was two (1-3) where four patients were nulliparous. The median blood loss was 125 mL (100-200 mL) with an operative time of 149 min (138-198 min) and median weight of the specimen of 181.5 g (66.5-219 g). The mean length of stay was 1.4 days (1-2 days). Five cases had conversion to laparoscopy and the majority (80%) occurred within the first ten cases. CONCLUSIONS: VANH is feasible but there is a learning curve to achieve competence in this technique, which requires adequate training in the early stages of adoption with careful case selection. Until further robust data is available to determine the clinical benefit and safety profile of VANH, patients should be carefully counselled and the decision on mode of hysterectomy be individualised.
Pickett CM, Seeratan DD, Mol BWJ et al. Surgical approach to hysterectomy for benign gynaecological disease. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2023; 8(8): Cd003677.
Einarsson JI, Matteson KA, Schulkin J et al. Minimally invasive hysterectomies‐a survey on attitudes and barriers among practicing gynecologists. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 2010; 17(2): 167–175.
Luchristt D, Brown O, Kenton K, Bretschneider CE. Trends in operative time and outcomes in minimally invasive hysterectomy from 2008 to 2018. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2021; 224(2): 202.e1–202.e12.
Wilson LF, Pandeya N, Mishra GD. Hysterectomy trends in Australia, 2000–2001 to 2013–2014: Joinpoint regression analysis. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2017; 96(10): 1170–1179.
Baekelandt JF, de Mulder PA, le Roy I et al. Hysterectomy by transvaginal natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery versus laparoscopy as a day‐care procedure: A randomised controlled trial. BJOG 2019; 126(1): 105–113.
Housmans S, Noori N, Kapurubandara S et al. Systematic review and meta‐analysis on hysterectomy by vaginal natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (vNOTES) compared to laparoscopic hysterectomy for benign indications. J Clin Med 2020; 9(12): 3959.
Kapurubandara S, Lowenstein L, Salvay H et al. Consensus on safe implementation of vaginal natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (vNOTES). Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2021; 263: 216–222.
Baekelandt J, Kapurubandara S. Benign Gynaecological procedures by vaginal natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (vNOTES): Complication data from a series of 1000 patients. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2021; 256: 221–224.
Nulens K, Bosteels J, de Rop C, Baekelandt J. vNOTES hysterectomy for large uteri: A retrospective cohort study of 114 patients. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 2021; 28(7): 1351–1356.
Wang X, Li J, Hua K, Chen Y. Transvaginal natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (vNOTES) hysterectomy for uterus weighing ≥1 kg. BMC Surg 2020; 20(1): 234.
Bouchez MC, Delporte V, Delplanque S et al. vNOTES hysterectomy: What about obese patients? J Minim Invasive Gynecol 2023; 30(7): 569–575.
Housmans S, Stuart A, Bosteels J et al. Standardized 10‐step approach for successfully performing a hysterectomy via vaginal natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2022; 101(6): 649–656.
Reynders A, Baekelandt J. Adnexectomy by poor man's transvaginal NOTES. Gynecol Surg 2015; 12(3): 207–211.
Dindo D, Demartines N, Clavien PA. Classification of surgical complications: A new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey. Ann Surg 2004; 240(2): 205–213.
Karkia R, Giacchino T, Taylor J et al. Hysterectomy and Adenextomy via transvaginal natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (vNOTES): A UK perspective with a case series of 33 patients. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2019; 242: 29–32.
Baron C, Netter A, Tourette C et al. Initial experience with vNOTES hysterectomy for benign conditions in a French university hospital. Facts Views Vis Obgyn 2022; 14(2): 147–153.
Lauterbach R, Matanes E, Amit A et al. Transvaginal natural orifice transluminal endoscopic (vNOTES) hysterectomy learning curve: Feasibility in the hands of skilled gynecologists. Isr Med Assoc J 2020; 22(1): 13–16.
Huang L, He L, Huang L et al. Learning curve analysis of transvaginal natural orifice transluminal endoscopic hysterectomy combined under the standard operating procedure. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2022; 159(3): 689–695.
Naval S, Naval R, Naval S. Transvaginal natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery hysterectomy aided by Transcervical instrumental uterine manipulation. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 2019; 26(7): 1233.
Guan X, Guan Z, Sunkara S, Thigpen B. Indocyanine green–assisted retrograde ureterolysis in robotic transvaginal NOTES for the Management of Stage IV endometriosis with obliterated Cul‐de‐sac. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 2023; 30(4): 266–267.
Guan X, Welch JR, Wu G. Robotic transvaginal natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery for resection of Parametrial and bowel deeply infiltrated endometriosis. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 2022; 29(3): 341–342.
Kohn JR, Frost AS, Tambovtseva A et al. Cost drivers for benign hysterectomy within a health care system: Influence of patient, perioperative, and hospital factors. Int J Gynecol Obstet 2023; 161(2): 616–623.
McCormack L, Nesbitt‐Hawes E, Deans R et al. A review of gynaecological surgical practices for trainees and certified specialists in Australia by volume using MBS and AIHW databases. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaeco 2022; 62(4): 574–580.
Cadish LA, Kropat G, Muffly TM. Hysterectomy volume among recent obstetrics and gynecology residency graduates. Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg 2021; 27(6): 382–387.
Ozceltik G, Hortu I, Itil IM, Yeniel AO. Impact of transvaginal natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery on hysterectomy practice. J Gynecol Obstet Hum Reprod 2022; 51(1): 102241.
Karp DR, Mukati M, Smith AL et al. Predictors of successful Salpingo‐oophorectomy at the time of vaginal hysterectomy. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 2012; 19(1): 58–62.
Chichura AM, Yao M, Bretschneider CE et al. Feasibility and outcomes of opportunistic bilateral salpingectomy in patients with traditional relative contraindications to vaginal hysterectomy. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 2020; 27(6): 1405–1413.
Messingschlager C, Ferrando CA, Chang OH. Intention matters: Success rate of bilateral salpingo‐oophorectomy at the time of vaginal hysterectomy for pelvic organ prolapse. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2023; 283: 54–58.
Kheirbek N, Delporte V, el Hajj H et al. Comparing vNOTES hysterectomy with laparoscopic hysterectomy for large uteri. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 2023; 30(11): 877–883.
