Literature DB >> 22183215

Quality of life after laparoscopic and abdominal hysterectomy: a randomized controlled trial.

Theodoor E Nieboer1, Jan C M Hendriks, Marlies Y Bongers, Mark E Vierhout, Kirsten B Kluivers.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To report the 4-year follow-up quality-of-life data of a randomized controlled trial between abdominal and laparoscopic hysterectomy and to investigate whether any difference in quality of life would remain long-term.
METHODS: Patients scheduled for hysterectomy for benign indications were randomized and received the Dutch version of the Short Form 36 questionnaire. The Short Form 36 consists of eight domains in which 100 points can be obtained. Higher scores denote a higher quality of life. A linear mixed model was used to study the differences between the two groups up to 4 years after surgery for each of the domains and the total Short Form 36 score separately.
RESULTS: Fifty-nine patients were randomized (27 to laparoscopic hysterectomy and 32 to abdominal hysterectomy). Median follow-up after surgery was 243 weeks (range, 188-303 weeks). The overall response rate on the Short Form 36 questionnaire after 4 years was 83% (49 of 59 patients). Total Short Form 36 questionnaire scores were significantly higher in patients after laparoscopic compared with abdominal hysterectomy up to 4 years after surgery (overall mean difference 50.4 points [95% confidence interval 1.0-99.7] in favor of laparoscopic hysterectomy). Higher scores were also found on the domains physical role functioning, social role functioning, and vitality.
CONCLUSION: With a follow-up of 4 years, patients who underwent laparoscopic hysterectomy reported a better quality of life compared with abdominal hysterectomy. Therefore, patients in whom vaginal hysterectomy is not possible should be able to have a laparoscopic hysterectomy, if feasible, in terms of uterine size. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN Register, www.controlled-trials.com/isrctn, ISRCTN15214439.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22183215     DOI: 10.1097/AOG.0b013e31823d3b00

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Obstet Gynecol        ISSN: 0029-7844            Impact factor:   7.661


  17 in total

Review 1.  A critical assessment of morcellation and its impact on gynecologic surgery and the limitations of the existing literature.

Authors:  Fong W Liu; Valerie B Galvan-Turner; Krista S Pfaendler; Teresa C Longoria; Robert E Bristow
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2015-01-09       Impact factor: 8.661

2.  Evaluation of the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program Surgical Risk Calculator in Gynecologic Oncology Patients Undergoing Minimally Invasive Surgery.

Authors:  Deanna Teoh; Rebi Nahum Halloway; Jennifer Heim; Rachel Isaksson Vogel; Colleen Rivard
Journal:  J Minim Invasive Gynecol       Date:  2016-10-24       Impact factor: 4.137

3.  Improvement in quality of life after robotic surgery results in patient satisfaction.

Authors:  Richard G Arms; Charlotte C Sun; Jennifer K Burzawa; Nicole D Fleming; Alpa M Nick; Vijayashri Rallapalli; Shannon N Westin; Larissa A Meyer; Pedro T Ramirez; Pamela T Soliman
Journal:  Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2015-07-18       Impact factor: 5.482

4.  Quality of life in patients affected by endometrial cancer: comparison among laparotomy, laparoscopy and vaginal approach.

Authors:  Roberto Berretta; Salvatore Gizzo; Marco Noventa; Vivienne Marrazzo; Laura Franchi; Costanza Migliavacca; Monica Michela; Carla Merisio; Alberto Bacchi Modena; Tito Silvio Patrelli
Journal:  Pathol Oncol Res       Date:  2015-01-10       Impact factor: 3.201

5.  Effect of Intraperitoneal Bupivacaine on Postoperative Pain in the Gynecologic Oncology Patient.

Authors:  Colleen Rivard; Rachel Isaksson Vogel; Deanna Teoh
Journal:  J Minim Invasive Gynecol       Date:  2015-07-26       Impact factor: 4.137

6.  Trends in Hysterectomy Incidence Rates During 2000-2015 in Denmark: Shifting from Abdominal to Minimally Invasive Surgical Procedures.

Authors:  Kathrine Dyhr Lycke; Johnny Kahlert; Rikke Damgaard; Ole Mogensen; Anne Hammer
Journal:  Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2021-06-01       Impact factor: 4.790

7.  Strategies to optimize the performance of Robotic-assisted laparoscopic hysterectomy.

Authors:  N Lambrou; R E Diaz; P Hinoul; D Parris; K Shoemaker; A Yoo; M Schwiers
Journal:  Facts Views Vis Obgyn       Date:  2014

8.  Radical Surgery for Endometriosis: Analysis of Quality of Life and Surgical Procedure.

Authors:  Cristina M De la Hera-Lazaro; Jose L Muñoz-González; Reyes Oliver Perez; Rocío Vellido-Cotelo; Alvaro Díez-Álvarez; Leticia Muñoz-Hernando; Carmen Alvarez-Conejo; Jesús S Jiménez-López
Journal:  Clin Med Insights Womens Health       Date:  2016-03-07

9.  Patient Perceptions of Open, Laparoscopic, and Robotic Gynecological Surgeries.

Authors:  Mohamad Irani; Cheruba Prabakar; Sepide Nematian; Nitasha Julka; Devika Bhatt; Pedram Bral
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2016-10-20       Impact factor: 3.411

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.