Journal of South Asian Federation of Obstetrics and Gynaecology

Register      Login

VOLUME 13 , ISSUE 2 ( March-April, 2021 ) > List of Articles

Original Article

Retrospective Analysis of Hysterectomy Cases in a Tertiary Care Institute, JNIMS

Mayanglambam Ronita Devi, Helen Kamei, Madhuri Laishram, Umalakshmi Lairellakpam, Kimthianmuang Guite, Ishor Kharel

Keywords : Abnormal uterine bleeding, Fibroid, Hysterectomy, Indications, Nondescent vaginal hysterectomy

Citation Information : Devi MR, Kamei H, Laishram M, Lairellakpam U, Guite K, Kharel I. Retrospective Analysis of Hysterectomy Cases in a Tertiary Care Institute, JNIMS. J South Asian Feder Obs Gynae 2021; 13 (2):97-100.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10006-1877

License: CC BY-NC 4.0

Published Online: 09-07-2021

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2021; The Author(s).


Aim: To study the indications and clinical profile of patients undergoing hysterectomy in Jawaharlal Nehru Institute of Medical Sciences (JNIMS). Materials and methods: A chart review of 132 hysterectomy cases in JNIMS, from January 2016 to January 2017, was done. Peripartum hysterectomy was excluded. The data regarding age, parity, indications of hysterectomy, length of hospital stay (LOHS), and additional surgical procedures were collected and analyzed. Results: Age distribution ranged from 34 to 73 years. The most common age-group was 41 to 50 years (57 patients, 43.18%), and multiparas (>2 parity) had maximal rate (68 patients, 51.52%) of hysterectomies. The most common indication for hysterectomy was abnormal uterine bleeding (AUB) (56 patients, 4242%). The abdominal route (75.76%) was more common than the vaginal route (23.48%) and minimal access surgery (MAS) (0.76%). Eighty-seven patients (65.91%) underwent bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy. The most noted frequency of hospital stay was 4 days (29 patients, 21.97%). Eleven appendectomies and one cholecystectomy were done as an additional surgical procedure. Conclusion: Nondescent vaginal hysterectomy (NDVH) is an established safe surgical procedure but such route is lesser used. The reason may be due to less exposure to such a procedure. Additional surgical procedure is an advantage in the abdominal route, but studies of the plausible risks that may be associated with such procedures are also lacking. The impact of preservation of the ovary is also a lesser-explored area. Hysterectomy seems to be the first option in treatment where resources are limited. It is time to review our approach to benign conditions before considering surgery as the first option. Clinical significance: Symptomatic relief is palpable by hysterectomy, but lack of studies involving the impact of hysterectomy, for example, psychological, social, economical, etc., is a cause of concern. More prospective data comparing indications of hysterectomy with its impact may be helpful in streamlining absolute indications, and patients may be benefitted from the adverse effects of surgical interventions.

  1. Sivapragasam V, Rengasamy CK, Patil AB. An audit of hysterectomies: indications, complications and clinicopathological analysis of hysterectomy specimens in a tertiary care center. Int J Reprod Contracept Obstet Gynecol 2018;7(9):3689–3694. DOI: 10.18203/2320-1770.ijrcog20183778.
  2. Saravana A, Patil SB, Patil SS. Clinopathological study of hysterectomised specimens. Int J Reprod Contracept Obstet Gynecol 2016;6(1):246–248. DOI: 10.18203/2320-1770.ijrcog20164667.
  3. Palve TT, Raghav M. Clinical trends, indications, postoperative complications of hysterectomy patients—a retrospective study. Global J Med Res 2019;19(2):Version 1.0. DOI:10.17406/gimra.
  4. Sharma C, Sharma M, Raina R, et al. Gynecological diseases in rural India: a critical appraisal of indications and route of surgery along with histopathology correlation of 922 women undergoing major gynecological surgery. J Mid-Life Health 2014;5(2):55–61. DOI: 10.4103/0976-7800.133988.
  5. Medhi P, Dowerah S, Borgohain D. A histopathological audit of hysterectomy: experience at a tertiary care teaching hospital. Int J Contemp Med Res 2016;3(4):1226–1228. DOI:10.21276/ijcmr.
  6. Prasad DR, Nair NV. Retrospective analysis of elective hysterectomy cases in a tertiary care centre. Int J Reprod Contracept Obstet Gynecol 2018;7(9):3714–3717. DOI: 10.18203/2320-1770.ijrcog20183782.
  7. Patil HA, Patil A, Mahajan SV. Histopathological findings in uterus and cervix of hysterectomy specimens. MVP J Med Sci 2015;2(1):26–29. DOI: 10.18311/mvpjms/2015/v2/i1/793.
  8. Nieboer TE, Johnson N, Lethaby A, et al. Surgical approach to hysterectomy for benign gynaecological disease. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2009;2009(3):CD003677. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD003677.pub4.
  9. Pandey D, Sehgal K, Saxena A, et al. An audit of indications, complications and justifications of hysterectomy at a tertiary hospital in India. Int J Rep Med 2014;2792273:1–6. DOI: 10.1155/2014/279273.
  10. Leung PL, Tsang SW, Yuen PM. An audit on hysterectomy for benign disease in public hospitals in Hong Kong. Hong Kong Med J 2007;13(3):187–193. PMID: 17548906.
  11. Salon EM, Schey D, Penalver M, et al. The safety of incidental appendectomy at the time of abdominal hysterectomy. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2003;189(6):1563–1567; discussion 1567–1568. DOI: 10.1016/s0002-9378(03)00936-0.
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.