Tags

Type your tag names separated by a space and hit enter

Value of laparoscopic assistance for vaginal hysterectomy with prophylactic bilateral oophorectomy.
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2006 Feb; 194(2):351-4.AJ

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

This study was undertaken to compare morbidity for women undergoing laparoscopy-assisted vaginal hysterectomy with bilateral oophorectomy (LAVHO) and vaginal hysterectomy with bilateral oophorectomy without laparoscopic assistance (VHO).

STUDY DESIGN

Between April 1, 2002, and February 1, 2004, a prospective randomized study at Marseille University Hospital (La Conception) included 48 patients who underwent a hysterectomy with prophylactic bilateral oophorectomy for benign uterine conditions. These patients were allocated to 2 groups (LAVHO vs VHO). The study variables were duration of surgery and of hospitalization and surgical and postoperative complications.

RESULTS

There was no significant difference in the duration of surgery between the LAVHO and VHO groups (100.2 +/- 27.9 vs 83.9 +/- 34.6, P = .08). The rate of complications was significantly higher in the LAVHO group (13/24 [54.1%] vs 6/24 [25%], P = .039).

CONCLUSION

The overall complication rate was higher with LAVHO than VHO. It thus appears that laparoscopic assistance is not useful in performing vaginal hysterectomies with prophylactic bilateral oophorectomies in patients without other related disorders (endometriosis, adhesions, adnexal anomalies).

Authors+Show Affiliations

Agostini A
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, La Conception University Hospital, Marseille, France.
Vejux N
No affiliation info available
Bretelle F
No affiliation info available
Collette E
No affiliation info available
De Lapparent T
No affiliation info available
Cravello L
No affiliation info available
Blanc B
No affiliation info available

MeSH

Blood Loss, SurgicalFemaleHumansHysterectomy, VaginalLaparoscopyLength of StayMiddle AgedOvariectomyProspective StudiesUterine Diseases

Pub Type(s)

Comparative Study
Journal Article
Randomized Controlled Trial

Language

eng

PubMed ID

16458628

Citation

Agostini, Aubert, et al. "Value of Laparoscopic Assistance for Vaginal Hysterectomy With Prophylactic Bilateral Oophorectomy." American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, vol. 194, no. 2, 2006, pp. 351-4.
Agostini A, Vejux N, Bretelle F, et al. Value of laparoscopic assistance for vaginal hysterectomy with prophylactic bilateral oophorectomy. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2006;194(2):351-4.
Agostini, A., Vejux, N., Bretelle, F., Collette, E., De Lapparent, T., Cravello, L., & Blanc, B. (2006). Value of laparoscopic assistance for vaginal hysterectomy with prophylactic bilateral oophorectomy. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 194(2), 351-4.
Agostini A, et al. Value of Laparoscopic Assistance for Vaginal Hysterectomy With Prophylactic Bilateral Oophorectomy. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2006;194(2):351-4. PubMed PMID: 16458628.
* Article titles in AMA citation format should be in sentence-case
TY - JOUR T1 - Value of laparoscopic assistance for vaginal hysterectomy with prophylactic bilateral oophorectomy. AU - Agostini,Aubert, AU - Vejux,Nadège, AU - Bretelle,Florence, AU - Collette,Emmanuelle, AU - De Lapparent,Thomas, AU - Cravello,Ludovic, AU - Blanc,Bernard, PY - 2005/01/07/received PY - 2005/06/28/revised PY - 2005/08/08/accepted PY - 2006/2/7/pubmed PY - 2006/4/21/medline PY - 2006/2/7/entrez SP - 351 EP - 4 JF - American journal of obstetrics and gynecology JO - Am J Obstet Gynecol VL - 194 IS - 2 N2 - OBJECTIVE: This study was undertaken to compare morbidity for women undergoing laparoscopy-assisted vaginal hysterectomy with bilateral oophorectomy (LAVHO) and vaginal hysterectomy with bilateral oophorectomy without laparoscopic assistance (VHO). STUDY DESIGN: Between April 1, 2002, and February 1, 2004, a prospective randomized study at Marseille University Hospital (La Conception) included 48 patients who underwent a hysterectomy with prophylactic bilateral oophorectomy for benign uterine conditions. These patients were allocated to 2 groups (LAVHO vs VHO). The study variables were duration of surgery and of hospitalization and surgical and postoperative complications. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in the duration of surgery between the LAVHO and VHO groups (100.2 +/- 27.9 vs 83.9 +/- 34.6, P = .08). The rate of complications was significantly higher in the LAVHO group (13/24 [54.1%] vs 6/24 [25%], P = .039). CONCLUSION: The overall complication rate was higher with LAVHO than VHO. It thus appears that laparoscopic assistance is not useful in performing vaginal hysterectomies with prophylactic bilateral oophorectomies in patients without other related disorders (endometriosis, adhesions, adnexal anomalies). SN - 1097-6868 UR - https://www.unboundmedicine.com/medline/citation/16458628/Value_of_laparoscopic_assistance_for_vaginal_hysterectomy_with_prophylactic_bilateral_oophorectomy_ DB - PRIME DP - Unbound Medicine ER -