These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Value of laparoscopic assistance for vaginal hysterectomy with prophylactic bilateral oophorectomy.
    Author: Agostini A, Vejux N, Bretelle F, Collette E, De Lapparent T, Cravello L, Blanc B.
    Journal: Am J Obstet Gynecol; 2006 Feb; 194(2):351-4. PubMed ID: 16458628.
    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).
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]