OBJECTIVE: Our objective was to compare the clinical outcomes and associated hospital charges between two methods of hysterectomy for patients with early-stage endometrial cancer. METHODS: Retrospective chart review of 320 patients with early-stage endometrial cancer treated by laparoscopic-assisted vaginal hysterectomy (LAVH) or total abdominal hysterectomy (TAH) was performed for the period of July 1, 1991, to September 30, 1996, at Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center. RESULTS: Sixty-nine patients (22%) were treated by LAVH, and 251 (78%) were treated by TAH. The majority of the patients (80%) had Stage I disease. The mean age was similar for both groups: 60 years for the LAVH vs 61 years for TAH. The mean weight was significantly lower for the LAVH group, 71 kg (range 43-117 kg), than for the TAH group, 82 kg (range 38-200 kg), (P < 0.05). Overall complication rates were lower among patients treated by LAVH. Operating room time was longer for the LAVH group (214 min) than for the TAH group (144 min) (P < 0.05). The median length of stay was significantly shorter for patients treated by LAVH (2.0 days) compared to TAH (6.0 days) (P < 0.05). Room charges were significantly higher for the TAH patients ($6960) compared to the LAVH patients ($3130) (P < 0.05). Overall mean total charges were significantly less for the LAVH group ($11,826) than for the TAH group ($15,189) (P < 0.05). With a median follow-up of 30 months for the TAH group and 18 months for the LAVH group, there was no significant difference in disease recurrence (P = 0.91). CONCLUSION: Patients treated by LAVH for early-stage endometrial cancer had significantly shorter hospitalization and fewer complications, resulting in less overall hospital charges when compared to patients treated by TAH. Long-term outcome was similar. Laparoscopic-assisted vaginal hysterectomy is an attractive alternative for selected patients with early-stage endometrial cancer. Copyright 1999 Academic Press.
OBJECTIVE: Our objective was to compare the clinical outcomes and associated hospital charges between two methods of hysterectomy for patients with early-stage endometrial cancer. METHODS: Retrospective chart review of 320 patients with early-stage endometrial cancer treated by laparoscopic-assisted vaginal hysterectomy (LAVH) or total abdominal hysterectomy (TAH) was performed for the period of July 1, 1991, to September 30, 1996, at Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center. RESULTS: Sixty-nine patients (22%) were treated by LAVH, and 251 (78%) were treated by TAH. The majority of the patients (80%) had Stage I disease. The mean age was similar for both groups: 60 years for the LAVH vs 61 years for TAH. The mean weight was significantly lower for the LAVH group, 71 kg (range 43-117 kg), than for the TAH group, 82 kg (range 38-200 kg), (P < 0.05). Overall complication rates were lower among patients treated by LAVH. Operating room time was longer for the LAVH group (214 min) than for the TAH group (144 min) (P < 0.05). The median length of stay was significantly shorter for patients treated by LAVH (2.0 days) compared to TAH (6.0 days) (P < 0.05). Room charges were significantly higher for the TAH patients ($6960) compared to the LAVH patients ($3130) (P < 0.05). Overall mean total charges were significantly less for the LAVH group ($11,826) than for the TAH group ($15,189) (P < 0.05). With a median follow-up of 30 months for the TAH group and 18 months for the LAVH group, there was no significant difference in disease recurrence (P = 0.91). CONCLUSION:Patients treated by LAVH for early-stage endometrial cancer had significantly shorter hospitalization and fewer complications, resulting in less overall hospital charges when compared to patients treated by TAH. Long-term outcome was similar. Laparoscopic-assisted vaginal hysterectomy is an attractive alternative for selected patients with early-stage endometrial cancer. Copyright 1999 Academic Press.
Authors: Margaret I Liang; Emeline M Aviki; Jason D Wright; Laura J Havrilesky; Leslie R Boyd; Haley A Moss; Elizabeth L Jewell; David E Cohn; Sachin M Apte; Patrick F Timmins; Ronald D Alvarez; Jill Rathbun; Elizabeth Lipinski; Susan White; Dorimar Siverio-Minardi; Emily M Ko Journal: Gynecol Oncol Date: 2020-01-06 Impact factor: 5.482
Authors: Gary S Leiserowitz; Guibo Xing; Arti Parikh-Patel; Rosemary Cress; Alireza Abidi; Anne O Rodriguez; John L Dalrymple Journal: Int J Gynecol Cancer Date: 2009-11 Impact factor: 3.437
Authors: M Patrick Lowe; Anna V Hoekstra; Arati Jairam-Thodla; Diljeet K Singh; Barbara M Buttin; John R Lurain; Julian C Schink Journal: J Robot Surg Date: 2009-02-27
Authors: Alessandro Santi; Annette Kuhn; Thomas Gyr; Markus Eberhard; Silke Johann; Andreas R Günthert; Michael D Mueller Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2009-06-16 Impact factor: 4.584