The journal of obstetrics and gynaecology research · 2025
Can vaginal natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery hysterectomy be performed in patients with an enlarged uterus?
СтатьяМногоцентровое исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Güngördük Kemal, Gülseren Varol, Uyar Berican Şahin, Akbaş Özgün, Üstüntaş Serkan, Biton Emre, Özdemir İsa Aykut
Аннотация
AIM: In this study, the application of vaginal natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (vNOTES) and conventional laparoscopy (CLS) underwent hysterectomy in patients with enlarged uterus was compared.
METHODS: This multicenter study enrolled patients with an enlarged uterus (≥300 g) who underwent minimally invasive hysterectomy using either CLS or vNOTES in the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology between January 2020 and December 2024.
RESULTS: Among the enrolled patients with an enlarged uterus, 39 (65.0%) underwent conventional laparoscopy, and 21 (35.0%) underwent vNOTES. The median operative times were 80 (50-140) min in the conventional laparoscopy group and 70 (60-130) min in the vNOTES group (p = 0.008). Median blood loss was significantly lower in the vNOTES group (140 [80-210] vs. 160 [90-370] mL; p = 0.013). The length of hospital stay was comparable between groups. Intraoperative bladder injury occurred in one patient in each group-conventional laparoscopy (2.6%) and vNOTES (4.8%) (p = 0.651). Conversion to laparotomy was required in three patients (7.7%) in the CLS group and one patient (4.8%) in the vNOTES group (p = 0.664). The visual analog scale pain score was significantly lower in the vNOTES group at 6, 12, and 24 h postoperatively.
CONCLUSION: vNOTES was confirmed to be a safe, feasible, and effective approach for hysterectomy in patients with an enlarged uterus.
METHODS: This multicenter study enrolled patients with an enlarged uterus (≥300 g) who underwent minimally invasive hysterectomy using either CLS or vNOTES in the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology between January 2020 and December 2024.
RESULTS: Among the enrolled patients with an enlarged uterus, 39 (65.0%) underwent conventional laparoscopy, and 21 (35.0%) underwent vNOTES. The median operative times were 80 (50-140) min in the conventional laparoscopy group and 70 (60-130) min in the vNOTES group (p = 0.008). Median blood loss was significantly lower in the vNOTES group (140 [80-210] vs. 160 [90-370] mL; p = 0.013). The length of hospital stay was comparable between groups. Intraoperative bladder injury occurred in one patient in each group-conventional laparoscopy (2.6%) and vNOTES (4.8%) (p = 0.651). Conversion to laparotomy was required in three patients (7.7%) in the CLS group and one patient (4.8%) in the vNOTES group (p = 0.664). The visual analog scale pain score was significantly lower in the vNOTES group at 6, 12, and 24 h postoperatively.
CONCLUSION: vNOTES was confirmed to be a safe, feasible, and effective approach for hysterectomy in patients with an enlarged uterus.