The journal of obstetrics and gynaecology research · 2026
Hysterectomy and Shull Suspension Using the V-NOTES Technique Versus Traditional Vaginal Surgery: A Prospective Analysis of Short-Term Efficacy and Safety.
СтатьяСравнительное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Schiavi Michele Carlo, Campanella Lorenzo, Cignini Pietro, Sasso Gianluca, Repace Eleonora Lara, Ferranti Giulia, Baia Alessia, Rossi Elisa, Melis Francesca, Arcangeletti Livia, Golovanova Natalia, Zullo Marzio Angelo, Morciano Andrea, Palazzetti Pierluigi, Valensise Herbert Carmelo Carlo, Manganelli Fabio, Ligato Azzurra, Bisogni Francesco Antonio, Bergamini Valentino, Grossi Giovanni
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study is to describe a modified method for applying Shull's technique using the V-NOTES approach and to compare it with the traditional vaginal technique in terms of efficacy, safety, operative duration, recurrence, and patient-reported outcomes at median follow-up.
METHODS: The study included 40 women with Stage ≥ III uterine prolapse (POP-Q) undergoing conventional vaginal hysterectomy with Shull suspension (vaginal native tissue repair [VNTR] Group A) or V-NOTES hysterectomy with endoscopic Shull suspension (vaginal natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery [V-NOTES] Group B) between December 2024 and December 2025. The median follow-up was 6 months. Informed consent was obtained. Outcomes included perioperative parameters, complications, hospital stay, recurrence, and quality-of-life and sexual function.
RESULTS: The median follow-up was 6 months (5-9); 22 patients underwent VNTR (Group A) and 18 V-NOTES (Group B) during hysterectomy and prolapse repair. Both procedures achieved anatomical improvement, with no difference in recurrence (Group A 1 case [4.5%] vs. Group B 0 cases [0%], p = 0.12). Operative time was comparable (Group A 112 ± 25 min vs. Group B 102 ± 22 min, p = 0.06), while hospital stay was shorter with V-NOTES (Group A 2 days (2-3) vs. Group B 1 day (1-2), p = 0.03). Complications were low (Group A 13.6% vs. Group B 0%, p = 0.05), with two ureteral events only in Group A (4.5% each; p = 0.21 and p = 0.22). Sexual function improved (FSFI Group A 29.63 ± 1.97 vs. Group B 29.23 ± 2.01, p = 0.001), with greater satisfaction in V-NOTES (PGI-I "Very much better": 68.2% vs. 88.8%; p = 0.002).
CONCLUSIONS: V-NOTES Shull suspension is a safe and effective alternative with advantages in recovery and patient-reported outcomes.
METHODS: The study included 40 women with Stage ≥ III uterine prolapse (POP-Q) undergoing conventional vaginal hysterectomy with Shull suspension (vaginal native tissue repair [VNTR] Group A) or V-NOTES hysterectomy with endoscopic Shull suspension (vaginal natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery [V-NOTES] Group B) between December 2024 and December 2025. The median follow-up was 6 months. Informed consent was obtained. Outcomes included perioperative parameters, complications, hospital stay, recurrence, and quality-of-life and sexual function.
RESULTS: The median follow-up was 6 months (5-9); 22 patients underwent VNTR (Group A) and 18 V-NOTES (Group B) during hysterectomy and prolapse repair. Both procedures achieved anatomical improvement, with no difference in recurrence (Group A 1 case [4.5%] vs. Group B 0 cases [0%], p = 0.12). Operative time was comparable (Group A 112 ± 25 min vs. Group B 102 ± 22 min, p = 0.06), while hospital stay was shorter with V-NOTES (Group A 2 days (2-3) vs. Group B 1 day (1-2), p = 0.03). Complications were low (Group A 13.6% vs. Group B 0%, p = 0.05), with two ureteral events only in Group A (4.5% each; p = 0.21 and p = 0.22). Sexual function improved (FSFI Group A 29.63 ± 1.97 vs. Group B 29.23 ± 2.01, p = 0.001), with greater satisfaction in V-NOTES (PGI-I "Very much better": 68.2% vs. 88.8%; p = 0.002).
CONCLUSIONS: V-NOTES Shull suspension is a safe and effective alternative with advantages in recovery and patient-reported outcomes.