Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
IMPORTANCE: Cervical preservation versus removal is commonly debated among urogynecologists performing sacrocolpopexy (SCP), the gold standard reconstructive procedure for prolapse. A randomized controlled trial is unlikely to ever be performed. OBJECTIVE: The objective was to compare the cost-effectiveness of total (TLH) versus supracervical (SCH) hysterectomy at the time of SCP. STUDY DESIGN: Markov microsimulation evaluated 5-year outcomes after SCP with TLH or SCH. Route-specific complications included bladder/ureteral injury, cuff dehiscence, port-site hernia, mesh exposure, prolapse recurrence with or without retreatment, and occult uterine cancer. Quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) incorporated recovery, prolapse recurrence, and cancer treatment states with an annual 3% discount rate. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA, n=10,000) assessed model uncertainty. RESULTS: Median costs were SCP/TLH=$16,117.50, SCP/SCH=$16,078.00 (Δ=$39.50, 0.2%). Median effectiveness was 4.65 QALYs for both. PSA showed TLH was more effective in 15.8%, SCH in 17.3%, with equal effectiveness in 67.0%. Net monetary benefit (NMB) favored SCH by $39.50 (<0.01% of total NMB). CONCLUSIONS: While risks vary between TLH and SCH, rare and mostly balanced complications, similar costs, and high efficacy regardless of route explain why both approaches perform equally overall.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Cadish et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: