Journal of minimally invasive gynecology · 2015
Multi-institution, Prospective, Randomized Trial to Compare the Success Rates of Single-port Versus Multiport Laparoscopic Hysterectomy for the Treatment of Uterine Myoma or Adenomyosis.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяМногоцентровое исследованиеРандомизированное исследованиеПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание 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.
Kim Tae-Joong, Shin So-Jin, Kim Tae-Hyun, Cho Chi-Heum, Kwon Sang-Hoon, Seong Seok Ju, Song Taejong, Hur Sooyoung, Kim Yong-Man, Lee Shin-Wha, Kim Young Tae, Nam Eun Ji, Kim Yong Beom, Lee Jung Ryeol, Roh Hyun-Jin, Chung Hyewon
Аннотация
STUDY OBJECTIVE: To compare the operative outcomes of patients undergoing either single-port or multiport laparoscopic hysterectomy (LH).
METHODS: Two hundred fifty-six women scheduled for LH for symptomatic myoma and/or adenomyosis from 8 tertiary teaching hospitals were randomized to single-port or multiport groups. Primary outcome was conversion and/or complication proportion of the planned procedure to determine whether the success proportion of the single-port approach was not inferior to that of the multiport approach. Secondary outcomes were postoperative pain and operative scar.
RESULTS: Demographic parameters including age, body mass index, parity, and history of vaginal and cesarean delivery were comparable between the 2 groups. The primary outcome of a combined conversion and/or complication rate was similar between the single-port and multiport groups at 8% and 10.3%, respectively. Conversions were similar between the groups with 4% of single-port cases and .8% of multiport cases. Transfusions were the most frequent complication required in 4.0% of single-port cases and 7.9% of multiport cases, with no difference between the groups. Concerning secondary outcomes, postoperative pain score and patient and observer scar assessment were not different between the 2 groups. Although not a specific outcome measure, there was no difference between the groups in blood loss, operative time, and postoperative hospital stay.
CONCLUSION: Single-port LH is not inferior to multiport LH in terms of conversion and/or complications rates, including transfusion. However, the single-port approach did not have any advantage over multiport LH with regard to pain or cosmetic outcomes. These findings were demonstrated by multi-institutional surgeons in Korea.
METHODS: Two hundred fifty-six women scheduled for LH for symptomatic myoma and/or adenomyosis from 8 tertiary teaching hospitals were randomized to single-port or multiport groups. Primary outcome was conversion and/or complication proportion of the planned procedure to determine whether the success proportion of the single-port approach was not inferior to that of the multiport approach. Secondary outcomes were postoperative pain and operative scar.
RESULTS: Demographic parameters including age, body mass index, parity, and history of vaginal and cesarean delivery were comparable between the 2 groups. The primary outcome of a combined conversion and/or complication rate was similar between the single-port and multiport groups at 8% and 10.3%, respectively. Conversions were similar between the groups with 4% of single-port cases and .8% of multiport cases. Transfusions were the most frequent complication required in 4.0% of single-port cases and 7.9% of multiport cases, with no difference between the groups. Concerning secondary outcomes, postoperative pain score and patient and observer scar assessment were not different between the 2 groups. Although not a specific outcome measure, there was no difference between the groups in blood loss, operative time, and postoperative hospital stay.
CONCLUSION: Single-port LH is not inferior to multiport LH in terms of conversion and/or complications rates, including transfusion. However, the single-port approach did not have any advantage over multiport LH with regard to pain or cosmetic outcomes. These findings were demonstrated by multi-institutional surgeons in Korea.