Intended for healthcare professionals

CCBYNC Open access
Research

Sacrospinous hysteropexy versus vaginal hysterectomy with uterosacral ligament suspension in women with uterine prolapse stage 2 or higher: observational follow-up of a multicentre randomised trial

BMJ 2019; 366 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.l5149 (Published 10 September 2019) Cite this as: BMJ 2019;366:l5149

Re: Sacrospinous hysteropexy versus vaginal hysterectomy with uterosacral ligament suspension in women with uterine prolapse stage 2 or higher: observational follow-up of a multicentre randomised trial

"Time-to-event analysis showed no differences in outcomes between the two procedures", yet the authors write that their study adds information on uterine preservation being more effective than vaginal hysterectomy.

Furthermore, the authors "believe that future risk of malignancy should not be regarded as a valid reason for removal of the uterus" but women with uterine prolapse should be properly informed and decide for themselves if they really want to keep an atrophic non-functioning organ which could later give them cancer.

The authors also dismiss the observed 1% risk of malignancy as low, but laparoscopic power morcellators in operating rooms were largely abandoned and relative lawsuits were issued for much less frequent cancer risks.

Reference
https://www.fda.gov/medical-devices/surgery-devices/laparoscopic-power-m...

Competing interests: No competing interests

11 September 2019
Stavros Saripanidis
Consultant in Obstetrics and Gynaecology
Thessaloniki, Greece