RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 Comparison of laparoscopy-assisted hysterectomies with conventional hysterectomies
JF Saudi Medical Journal
JO Saudi Med J
FD Prince Sultan Military Medical City
SP 813
OP 816
VO 30
IS 6
A1 Abdollahi, Seddigheh F.
A1 Bahlouli, Abolfazl
A1 Mostafa, Parvin G.
A1 Rasooli, Susan
A1 Morteza, Ghojazadeh
YR 2009
UL http://smj.org.sa/content/30/6/813.abstract
AB OBJECTIVE: To compare operative and early postoperative outcomes of laparoscopic-assisted vaginal hysterectomy (LAVH) and laparoscopy assisted supracervical hysterectomy (LASH) with conventional hysterectomy by laparotomy or vaginally, including patients undergoing total or subtotal hysterectomy for benign gynecologic disease.METHODS: Three different methods of hysterectomies: laparoscopic, vaginal, and abdominal, were compared at the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology of Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Tabriz, Iran, including all patients with indication of uterus removal for benign uterine disease from January 2005 to December 2007. The regional medical research ethics committee approved the study.RESULTS: A total of 288 hysterectomies were performed: 165 (57.3%) abdominal hysterectomy, 85 (29.5%) vaginal hysterectomy, and 38 (13.2%) laparoscopic-assisted hysterectomy. Laparoscopy assisted hysterectomy (LAVH, LASH) was associated with significantly lower early postoperative pain scores and complication rates, less blood loss, short hospital stay, and resulted in lower hospital charge with reusable devices statistically (p=0.03).CONCLUSION: Laparoscopy is preferred to abdominal hysterectomy by laparotomy and to vaginal hysterectomy. Though vaginal hysterectomy had less complications and rapid recovery and patient satisfaction as compared with abdominal, but it was limited for multiparous patients with some degree of pelvic organ prolapse. Laparoscopy is preferred to abdominal hysterectomy by laparotomy and to vaginal hysterectomy. Though vaginal hysterectomy had less complications and rapid recovery and patient satisfaction as compared with abdominal, but it was limited for multiparous patients with some degree of pelvic organ prolapse.