Literature DB >> 8961674

Comparison of laparoscopically assisted vaginal hysterectomy and abdominal hysterectomy in taiwan.

F T Kung1, F R Hwang, H Lin, M C Tai, C H Hsieh, S Y Chang.   

Abstract

In order to clarify the feasibility of laparoscopically assisted vaginal hysterectomy (LAVH) using a not-for-extra charge instrument and to determine its cost-effectiveness in the Taiwan national health care system, we designed a prospective comparison which recruited candidates with nonmalignant uterine tumors prepared for hysterectomy to assess treatment by the laparoscopic versus the laparotomic approach. There were 144 patients in the laparoscopic group and 157 patients in the laparotomic group. The two groups were similar in characteristics. A total of 138 LAVHs were completed with six conversions (4.2%) to abdominal hysterectomy. Intraoperatively, the mean operating time in the LAVH group was longer than in the laparotomic group (134 vs 112 minutes, p < 0.001). No statistically significant differences were found between the two groups in mean estimated blood loss (260 vs 259 mL) and complications (5.8 vs 4.5%). Postoperatively, mean flatulence-relief time (27.4 vs 31.3 hours) and intramuscular meperidine requirements (1.6 vs 2.5 ampoules, 1 ampoule = 50 mg) were significantly less with LAVH. There were no differences in mean hemoglobin levels (10.7 vs 10.9 g/dL), complications (9.4 vs 13.4%, p = 0.288), or hospital stay (4.9 vs 5.2 days, p = 0.058). The mean total hospital charges (NT$48,390 vs 41,649) and insurance-paid costs (NT$43,992 vs 38,389) were significantly greater in the LAVH group. In conclusion, LAVH when performed by an experienced laparoscopist and for adequately selected patients, permits a better short-term convalescence, but is more expensive compared with conventional abdominal hysterectomy.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1996        PMID: 8961674

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Formos Med Assoc        ISSN: 0929-6646            Impact factor:   3.282


  4 in total

1.  Total laparoscopic hysterectomy versus total abdominal hysterectomy: cohort review of patients with uterine neoplasia.

Authors:  Katherine A O'Hanlan; Gloria Shining Huang; Anne-Caroline Garnier; Suzanne L Dibble; Mirjam L Reuland; Lisbeth Lopez; Rebecca L Pinto
Journal:  JSLS       Date:  2005 Jul-Sep       Impact factor: 2.172

2.  Body Mass Index and Its Role in Total Laparoscopic Hysterectomy.

Authors:  Shilpa Bhandari; Pallavi Agrawal; Aparna Singh
Journal:  Int Sch Res Notices       Date:  2014-10-28

Review 3.  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 4.  Management of Cesarean Scar Pregnancy: A Single-Institution Retrospective Review.

Authors:  P Giampaolino; N De Rosa; I Morra; A Bertrando; A Di Spiezio Sardo; B Zizolfi; C Ferrara; L Della Corte; G Bifulco
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2018-03-05       Impact factor: 3.411

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.