Literature DB >> 10203664

Prospective randomized clinical trial of laparoscopically assisted vaginal hysterectomy versus total abdominal hysterectomy.

T Falcone1, M F Paraiso, E Mascha.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: We compared operative time, length of hospital stay, postoperative recovery, return to work, and costs for women undergoing laparoscopically assisted vaginal hysterectomy or abdominal hysterectomy. STUDY
DESIGN: A prospective randomized clinical trial of laparoscopically assisted vaginal hysterectomy (n = 24) versus abdominal hysterectomy (n = 24) was carried out in a tertiary care setting. The main outcome variables were operative time, length of hospital stay, and return to work. Secondary outcomes were postoperative pain and return to normal activity as determined by weekly visual analog scales and daily diary. Hospital costs were calculated.
RESULTS: The laparoscopically assisted vaginal hysterectomy group had longer operative times (median and quartiles, laparoscopically assisted vaginal hysterectomy 180 [139, 225] minutes vs abdominal hysterectomy 130 [97, 155] minutes), lower requirements for postoperative intravenous analgesia (patient-controlled analgesia pump, median and quartiles: laparoscopically assisted vaginal hysterectomy 22.1 [15.9, 23.5] hours, abdominal hysterectomy 36.7 [26.2, 45.0] hours), shorter length of hospital stay (median and quartiles, laparoscopically assisted vaginal hysterectomy 1.5 [1.0, 2.3] days, abdominal hysterectomy 2.5 [1.5, 2.5] days), and quicker return to work (Kaplan-Meier analysis, P =.03). Both procedures had similar hospital costs (P =.21).
CONCLUSION: Laparoscopically assisted vaginal hysterectomy appears to allow patients a more rapid postoperative recovery and an earlier return to work with hospital costs similar to those of abdominal hysterectomy.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1999        PMID: 10203664     DOI: 10.1016/s0002-9378(99)70667-8

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol        ISSN: 0002-9378            Impact factor:   8.661


  14 in total

Review 1.  Natural orifice hysterectomy.

Authors:  Michael D Moen; Michael B Noone; Denise M Elser
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct       Date:  2008-06-11

2.  Robotically assisted hysterectomy: 100 cases after the learning curve.

Authors:  Thomas N Payne; Francis R Dauterive
Journal:  J Robot Surg       Date:  2010-03-18

Review 3.  Methods of hysterectomy: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.

Authors:  Neil Johnson; David Barlow; Anne Lethaby; Emma Tavender; Liz Curr; Ray Garry
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2005-06-25

4.  Comparison of minimally invasive surgical approaches for hysterectomy at a community hospital: robotic-assisted laparoscopic hysterectomy, laparoscopic-assisted vaginal hysterectomy and laparoscopic supracervical hysterectomy.

Authors:  Bang N Giep; Hoang N Giep; Helen B Hubert
Journal:  J Robot Surg       Date:  2010-08-10

Review 5.  Evaluation of quality of life after laparoscopic surgery: evidence-based guidelines of the European Association for Endoscopic Surgery.

Authors:  D Korolija; S Sauerland; S Wood-Dauphinée; C C Abbou; E Eypasch; M García Caballero; M A Lumsden; B Millat; J R T Monson; G Nilsson; R Pointner; W Schwenk; A Shamiyeh; A Szold; E Targarona; B Ure; E Neugebauer
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2004-04-27       Impact factor: 4.584

6.  The eVALuate study: two parallel randomised trials, one comparing laparoscopic with abdominal hysterectomy, the other comparing laparoscopic with vaginal hysterectomy.

Authors:  Ray Garry; Jayne Fountain; Su Mason; Jeremy Hawe; Vicky Napp; Jason Abbott; Richard Clayton; Graham Phillips; Mark Whittaker; Richard Lilford; Stephen Bridgman; Julia Brown
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2004-01-07

7.  Economic and Survival Implications of Use of Electric Power Morcellation for Hysterectomy for Presumed Benign Gynecologic Disease.

Authors:  Jason D Wright; Rosa R Cui; Anqi Wang; Ling Chen; Ana I Tergas; William M Burke; Cande V Ananth; June Y Hou; Alfred I Neugut; Sarah M Temkin; Y Claire Wang; Dawn L Hershman
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2015-10-08       Impact factor: 13.506

8.  Comparison of strength of sacrocolpopexy mesh attachment using barbed and nonbarbed sutures.

Authors:  Marjorie L Pilkinton; Gregory C Levine; Laura Bennett; Harvey A Winkler; Dara F Shalom; Peter S Finamore
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2017-10-04       Impact factor: 2.894

Review 9.  Costs and effects of abdominal versus laparoscopic hysterectomy: systematic review of controlled trials.

Authors:  Claudia B M Bijen; Karin M Vermeulen; Marian J E Mourits; Geertruida H de Bock
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2009-10-05       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 10.  Surgical approach to hysterectomy for benign gynaecological disease.

Authors:  Johanna W M Aarts; Theodoor E Nieboer; Neil Johnson; Emma Tavender; Ray Garry; Ben Willem J Mol; Kirsten B Kluivers
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2015-08-12
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.