Comparison of Vaginal Cuff Dehiscence After Total Laparoscopic Hysterectomy and Total Abdominal Hysterectomy

2016 ◽  
Vol 23 (7) ◽  
pp. S197
Author(s):  
S Kim ◽  
U Ju ◽  
W Kang
Keyword(s):  
Laparoscopic Hysterectomy ◽  
Total Abdominal Hysterectomy ◽  
Abdominal Hysterectomy ◽  
Total Laparoscopic Hysterectomy ◽  
Vaginal Cuff ◽  
Vaginal Cuff Dehiscence

scholarly journals Laparoscopic approach to hysterectomy

2013 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 117-126
Author(s):  
Hakan Nazik
Keyword(s):  
Laparoscopic Approach ◽  
Abnormal Uterine Bleeding ◽  
Laparoscopic Hysterectomy ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Total Abdominal Hysterectomy ◽  
Abdominal Hysterectomy ◽  
Pelvic Organ ◽  
Uterine Bleeding ◽  
Total Laparoscopic Hysterectomy ◽  
Uterine Leiomyomata

Modern laparoscopic surgery is widely used throughout the world as it offers greater advantages than open procedures. The laparoscopic approach to hysterectomy has evolved over the last 20 years. Hysterectomies are performed abdominally, vaginally, laparoscopically or, more recently, with robotic assistance. Indications for a total laparoscopic hysterectomy are similar to those for total abdominal hysterectomy, and most commonly include uterine leiomyomata, pelvic organ prolapse, and abnormal uterine bleeding. When hysterectomy is going to be performed, the surgeon should decide which method is safer and more cost-effective. This paper aims to make a review of the indications, techniques and advantages of laparoscopic hysterectomy as well as the criteria to be used for appropriate patient selection.

scholarly journals Cost-effectiveness of total laparoscopic hysterectomy and non-descent vaginal hysterectomy versus total abdominal hysterectomy: a multi-centre randomized controlled trial

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chanil Deshan Ekanayake ◽  
Arunasalam Pathmeswaran ◽  
Sanjeewa Kularatna ◽  
Rasika Herath ◽  
Prasantha Wijesinghe
Keyword(s):  
Randomized Controlled Trial ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Vaginal Hysterectomy ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Laparoscopic Hysterectomy ◽  
Total Abdominal Hysterectomy ◽  
Abdominal Hysterectomy ◽  
Total Laparoscopic Hysterectomy ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Clinical Trials Registry

Abstract Background: Hysterectomy is the most common major surgical procedure in gynaecology. The methods in mainstream practice are; total abdominal hysterectomy (TAH), non-descent vaginal hysterectomy (NDVH) and total laparoscopic hysterectomy (TLH). Most patients requiring hysterectomy for benign gynaecological conditions can be operated using one of these methods. The aim of this study was to study cost-effectiveness of NDVH, TLH and TAH in a low resource setting. Methods: A pragmatic multi-centre three arm (parallel groups) RCT was done in the professorial gynaecology unit of the North Colombo Teaching Hospital, Ragama and the gynaecology unit of the District General Hospital, Mannar, Sri Lanka. Participants were patients requiring hysterectomy for non-malignant uterine causes. Exclusion criteria were uterus>14 weeks, previous pelvic surgery, medical illnesses which contraindicate laparoscopic surgery, and those requiring incontinence surgery or pelvic floor surgery. The main outcome measures were time to recover and cost. The willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold was set at USD 1000. Results: There was no significant difference in median time to recover (inter quartile range) among TAH, NDVH and TLH which was 35 (30-45), 32 (24.5-60) and 30 (25.5-45) days respectively (p=0.37). The difference in area under the curve for quality adjusted life years (QALYs) was 1.33 and 5.21 for NDVH and TLH compared to TAH. The direct cost (median, interquartile range) of a TLH [USD 349 (322-378)] was significantly higher compared to TAH [USD 289 (264-307)] and NDVH [USD 279 (255-305)]. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for TLH was USD 12/day whereas NDVH showed a net benefit as both costs and median effect were superior to TAH. The incremental cost utility ratio (ICUR) for TLH and NDVH were 12 and 38 USD/QALY. The ICUR for TLH compared to NDVH was USD 3/per QALY. The net monetary benefit (NMB) was USD 4897 and USD 1264 for TLH and NDVH respectively. Conclusion: Despite there being only a marginal difference among the three routes when considering time to recover, a cost-effectiveness approach using ICER, ICUR and NMB shows that alternate routes, NDVH and TLH to be superior to the conventional TAH. Trial Registration: Sri Lanka clinical trials registry, SLCTR/2016/020 and the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, U1111-1194-8422, on 26 July 2016. Available from: http://slctr.lk/trials/515. Keywords: Non-descent vaginal hysterectomy, total laparoscopic hysterectomy, total abdominal hysterectomy, cost-effectiveness, randomized controlled trial.

scholarly journals Comparison between Laparoscopic Hysterectomy and Abdominal Hysterectomy

2014 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 26-28
Author(s):  
R Shrestha ◽  
LH Yu
Keyword(s):  
Blood Loss ◽  
Hospital Stay ◽  
Laparoscopic Hysterectomy ◽  
Total Abdominal Hysterectomy ◽  
Abdominal Hysterectomy ◽  
Total Laparoscopic Hysterectomy ◽  
Short Hospital Stay ◽  
Early Recovery ◽  
Duration Of Hospital Stay ◽  
Operative Recovery

Aims: Hysterectomy can be performed by abdominal, vaginal and laparoscopic methods. Laparoscopic hysterectomy has been reported as an alternative to traditional abdominal hysterectomy with benefit of early recovery, short hospital stay and less operative complications. This study compared laparoscopic versus abdominal hysterectomy in terms of surgery time, blood loss, post-operative recovery, and duration of hospital stay. Methods: This is a retrospective comparative study among sixty patients who underwent laparoscopic or abdominal hysterectomy for various indications in the Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology of the Third affiliated hospital of Zhengzhou University from January to March 2007. The data of the patients meeting the set criteria were obtained from the hospital records and hospital based computerized coding system. Enrolled cases were divided in two groups with thirty in each arm. Group TLH (total laparoscopic hysterectomy) was designated for patients who underwent total laparoscopic hysterectomy and group TAH (total abdominal hysterectomy) for those who underwent total abdominal hysterectomy. Results: There was comparatively less blood loss in TLH group (60.2±5.17 ml versus 75.7±7.12 ml) but it was statistically insignificant (p=0.12). The laparoscopic hysterectomy took longer time (107.6±32.4 min versus 74.9±31.1 min) than the abdominal (p<0.001). There was early recovery among TLH group 1.6±0.6 days versus 2.1±0.5 days in TAH group (p=0.001). Mean duration of hospital stay was significantly shorter in TLH group 7.6±1.9 days versus 10.1±2.1 days in TAH group (p<0.001). Conclusions: Laparoscopic hyserectomy is an effective alternative to abdominal hysterectomy with the advantage of less intra-operative blood loss, fast recovery and short hospital stay. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3126/njog.v9i1.11183 NJOG 2014 Jan-Jun; 2(1):26-28

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document