We have located links that may give you full text access.
Laparoscopic Versus Open Hysterectomy for Benign Disease in Uteri Weighing >1 kg: A Retrospective Analysis on 258 Patients.
Journal of Minimally Invasive Gynecology 2018 January
STUDY OBJECTIVE: To present a large single-center series of hysterectomies for uteri ≥1 kg and to compare the laparoscopic and open abdominal approach in terms of perioperative outcomes and complications.
DESIGN: A retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data (Canadian Task Force classification II-2).
SETTING: An academic research center.
PATIENTS: Consecutive women who underwent hysterectomy for uteri ≥1 kg between January 2000 and December 2016. Patients with a preoperative diagnosis of uterine malignancy or suspected uterine malignancy were excluded. The subjects were divided according to the intended initial surgical approach (i.e., open or laparoscopic). The 2 groups were compared in terms of intraoperative data and postoperative outcomes. Multivariable analysis was performed to identify possible independent predictors of overall complications. A subanalysis including only obese women was accomplished.
INTERVENTIONS: Total laparoscopic versus abdominal hysterectomy (±bilateral adnexectomy).
MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Intra- and postoperative surgical outcomes. A total of 258 patients were included; 55 (21.3%) women were initially approached by open surgery and 203 (78.7%) by laparoscopy. Nine (4.4%) conversions from laparoscopic to open surgery were registered. The median operative time was longer in the laparoscopic group (120 [range, 50-360] vs 85 [range, 35-240] minutes, p = .014). The estimated blood loss (150 [range, 0-1700] vs 200 [50-3000] mL, p = .04), postoperative hemoglobin drop, and hospital stay (1 [range, 1-8] vs 3 [range, 1-8] days, p < .001) were lower among patients operated by laparoscopy. No difference was found between groups in terms of intra- and postoperative complications. However, the overall rate of complications (10.8% vs. 27.2%, p = .015) and the incidence of significant complications (defined as intraoperative adverse events or postoperative Clavien-Dindo ≥2 events, 4.4% vs 10.9%, p = .04) were significantly higher among patients who initially received open surgery. The laparoscopic approach was found to be the only independent predictor of a lower incidence of overall complications (odds ratio = 0.42; 95% confidence interval, 0.19-0.9). The overall morbidity of minimally invasive hysterectomy was lower also in the subanalysis concerning only obese patients.
CONCLUSION: In experienced hands and in dedicated centers, laparoscopic hysterectomy for uteri weighing ≥1 kg is feasible and safe. Minimally invasive surgery retains its well-known advantages over open surgery even in patients with extremely enlarged uteri.
DESIGN: A retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data (Canadian Task Force classification II-2).
SETTING: An academic research center.
PATIENTS: Consecutive women who underwent hysterectomy for uteri ≥1 kg between January 2000 and December 2016. Patients with a preoperative diagnosis of uterine malignancy or suspected uterine malignancy were excluded. The subjects were divided according to the intended initial surgical approach (i.e., open or laparoscopic). The 2 groups were compared in terms of intraoperative data and postoperative outcomes. Multivariable analysis was performed to identify possible independent predictors of overall complications. A subanalysis including only obese women was accomplished.
INTERVENTIONS: Total laparoscopic versus abdominal hysterectomy (±bilateral adnexectomy).
MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Intra- and postoperative surgical outcomes. A total of 258 patients were included; 55 (21.3%) women were initially approached by open surgery and 203 (78.7%) by laparoscopy. Nine (4.4%) conversions from laparoscopic to open surgery were registered. The median operative time was longer in the laparoscopic group (120 [range, 50-360] vs 85 [range, 35-240] minutes, p = .014). The estimated blood loss (150 [range, 0-1700] vs 200 [50-3000] mL, p = .04), postoperative hemoglobin drop, and hospital stay (1 [range, 1-8] vs 3 [range, 1-8] days, p < .001) were lower among patients operated by laparoscopy. No difference was found between groups in terms of intra- and postoperative complications. However, the overall rate of complications (10.8% vs. 27.2%, p = .015) and the incidence of significant complications (defined as intraoperative adverse events or postoperative Clavien-Dindo ≥2 events, 4.4% vs 10.9%, p = .04) were significantly higher among patients who initially received open surgery. The laparoscopic approach was found to be the only independent predictor of a lower incidence of overall complications (odds ratio = 0.42; 95% confidence interval, 0.19-0.9). The overall morbidity of minimally invasive hysterectomy was lower also in the subanalysis concerning only obese patients.
CONCLUSION: In experienced hands and in dedicated centers, laparoscopic hysterectomy for uteri weighing ≥1 kg is feasible and safe. Minimally invasive surgery retains its well-known advantages over open surgery even in patients with extremely enlarged uteri.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Challenges in Septic Shock: From New Hemodynamics to Blood Purification Therapies.Journal of Personalized Medicine 2024 Februrary 4
Molecular Targets of Novel Therapeutics for Diabetic Kidney Disease: A New Era of Nephroprotection.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 April 4
The 'Ten Commandments' for the 2023 European Society of Cardiology guidelines for the management of endocarditis.European Heart Journal 2024 April 18
A Guide to the Use of Vasopressors and Inotropes for Patients in Shock.Journal of Intensive Care Medicine 2024 April 14
Diagnosis and Management of Cardiac Sarcoidosis: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association.Circulation 2024 April 19
Essential thrombocythaemia: A contemporary approach with new drugs on the horizon.British Journal of Haematology 2024 April 9
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app