Related Experiment Video
Updated: Mar 20, 2026
Laparoscopic Extracorporeal Knot-Tying for Uterine Vessel Occlusion during Hysterectomy with Cervical Cerclage in Large Uteri
Published on: September 12, 2025
Peritoneal closure during laparoscopic supracervical hysterectomy
Holm Eggemann1, Nara Asbahr Mitrik2, Otto Kabdebo2
1Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University Clinic Magdeburg, Germany, Gerhart-Hauptmann Str. 35, 39108, Magdeburg, Germany. holm.eggemann@med.ovgu.de.
Objective:
Our goal was to compare postoperative pain and analgesic requirements regarding closure and non-closure of the peritoneum in women undergoing laparoscopic supracervical hysterectomy (LSH).
Study Design:
A prospective cohort study was designed to investigate the impact of peritoneal closure for LSH. Postoperative pain was measured by a visual analogue scale (VAS) and analgesic requirements were assessed. Intra- and postoperative complications and operative time were recorded.
Results:
A total of 104 patients were enrolled. Fifty-two (50 %) women underwent a LSH with peritoneal closure and 52 (50 %) underwent LSH without closure. The baseline characteristics were well balanced between the groups except for age; women undergoing LSH without peritoneal closure were significantly younger (p < 0.008, t test). The median operative time was 53 (26-105) minutes for LSH with peritoneal closure and 44 (24-83) minutes for LSH without peritoneal closure, a median reduction of 9 minutes (p = 0.007). No differences were found in uterine weight, intra- and post-operative complications, median haemoglobin drop or time in hospital when contrasting both groups. Both groups had similar VAS-pain scores and needed similar analgesic therapies.
Conclusions:
The peritoneal closure at LSH provides no short-term postoperative advantages over a non-closure approach, and it prolongs the operative time and anaesthetic exposure. Our data suggest that peritoneal closure is not necessary in LSH.
