Minilaparotomy hysterectomy: A worthwhile alternative

Mahendru, Rajiv; Malik, Savita; Mittal, Amit; Sekhon, Parneet K.; Malik, Nishita; Mahendru, Tina Anand

doi:10.1111/j.1447-0756.2010.01348.x

Cited by 6 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…These results are similar to that reported by Sharma et al (7) and Mahendru et al (13) . This significant difference could be attributed to less intestinal handling ,less exposure to room temperature with consequent tissue dryness ,non use of laparotomy pads ,and less electrolyte disturbance.…”

Section: Comparative Study Between Minilaparotomy ………supporting

confidence: 83%

“…Also, the mean pain score was higher (5.2 ± 1.1) and sometimes the patients needed further analgesia . These results are comparable to that reported by Sharma et al (7) and Mahendru et al (13) . Regarding group B ,all the parameters of comparison were superior to that in group A .The recent trends towards minimally invasive surgery has lead to the continuous trials of refinement in laparotomy techniques .…”

Section: Comparative Study Between Minilaparotomy ………supporting

confidence: 82%

“…The complication rate in our study was comparable to that reported by Chalkoo et al (1) ; Mahendru et al (13) and Royo et al (14) ;, while it was less than that reported by Sharma et al (7) and Hoffman and Lynch (11) .…”

Section: Comparative Study Between Minilaparotomy ………supporting

confidence: 74%

“…(1) (20 ml) and that reported by Gungor et al (12) (100 ml), while it was less than that reported by Mahendru et al (13) (240 ml) and Sharma et al (7) (240 ml).The wide range of blood loss in this group (50 -250 ml) can be attributed to the adhesions found in some cases with previous pelvic surgery.…”

Section: Comparative Study Between Minilaparotomy ………contrasting

confidence: 53%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Comparative Study Between Minilaparotomy Hysterectomy and Laparoscopic Hysterectomy for Benign Uterine Lesions

Saleh

Ibrahema

El-Behidya

et al. 2013

Zagazig University Medical Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: The aim of the work is to investigate whether minilaparotomy hysterectomy for benign uterine lesions might be a reasonable alternative to laparoscopic hysterectomy in terms of operative and postoperative short-term outcomes. Methods: 105 patients scheduled to undergo total hysterectomy for a benign uterine lesion were divided into 3 groups according to their selection of the method of intervention after counseling: Group A (35 patients) minilaparotomy hysterectomy using conventional sutures.Group B (35 patients) minilaparotomy hysterectomy using bipolar vessel sealing system (Ligasure).Group C (35 patients) laparoscopic hysterectomy using Ligasure. Result(s): The operating time in Group A (84.7  9.9 minutes), group B (55.3  7.8 minutes), while group C ( 94.8  16 minutes).The duration until resumption of intestinal sounds in group C (12.3  2.5 hours) in comparison to group A (17.4  1.9 hours) and group B (16.5  1.76 hours). Blood loss in group B (99.1 ± 30.8 ml) ,group A (130.3 ± 54.4 ml) and group C (136.6 ± 6.6 ml). The longest hospital stay occurred in group A (31.8 ± 5.7 hours) versus groups B (20.7 ± 2.5 hours) and C (19.3 ± 6 hours). The highest pain score was observed in group A (5.2 ± 1.1) versus groups B (3.8 ± 1.6) and C (3.7 ± 1.2).There was no significant difference in the incidence of intraoperative or postoperative complications. Conclusion(s):The use of ligasure bipolar vessel sealing system in minilaparotomy hysterectomy was associated with less operative time and intraoperative blood loss, while it was comparable to laparoscopic hysterectomy in hospital stay and postoperative pain scoring with low morbidity and a short hospital stay. It may be a suitable alternative to laparoscopic hysterectomy which is ideal in areas which lack high laparoscopic experience or facilities.

show abstract

Section: Comparative Study Between Minilaparotomy ………supporting

confidence: 83%

Section: Comparative Study Between Minilaparotomy ………supporting

confidence: 82%

Section: Comparative Study Between Minilaparotomy ………supporting

confidence: 74%

Section: Comparative Study Between Minilaparotomy ………contrasting

confidence: 53%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Comparative Study Between Minilaparotomy Hysterectomy and Laparoscopic Hysterectomy for Benign Uterine Lesions

Saleh

Ibrahema

El-Behidya

et al. 2013

Zagazig University Medical Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Studies conducted to compare the results of conventional abdominal hysterectomy and MLH concluded that MLH provides a minimal access and less invasive cost-effective option/alternative to the traditional abdominal approach obviating the need for any additional expensive equipment and, above all, improves upon the perioperative outcome, notwithstanding, whatsoever, on the quality of surgery [ 14 , 15 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Feasibility and Compatibility of Minilaparotomy Hysterectomy in a Low-Resource Setting

Agarwal

Samanth

Pandey

et al. 2018

Obstetrics and Gynecology International

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction Minilaparotomy hysterectomy (MLH) relies on the simplicity of the traditional open technique of abdominal hysterectomy, imparts cosmesis and faster recovery of laparoscopic hysterectomy yet avoids the long learning curve and cost of expensive setup and instrumentation associated with the minimally invasive approaches, namely, laparoscopy and robotics. In the present study, we tried to ascertain whether the results obtained with MLH can be compared to LAVH in terms of its feasibility, intraoperative variables, and complications. The null hypothesis was that both MLH and LAVH are comparable techniques; thus, where cost and surgeon's experience are the confining issues, patients can be reassured that MLH gives comparable results. Materials and Methods This was a prospective observational study done over a period of two years at a university teaching hospital. A total of 65 patients were recruited, but only 52 (MLH: 27; LAVH: 25) could be included in final analysis. All surgeries were performed by one of the two gynecologists with almost equal surgical competence, and outcomes were compared. Results MLH is a feasible option for benign gynecological pathologies as none of the patients required increase in the initial incision (4–6 cm). MLH could be done for larger uteri (MLH: 501.30 ± 327.96 g versus LAVH: 216.60 ± 160.01 g; p < 0.001), in shorter duration (MLH: 115.00 ± 21.43 min versus LAVH 172.00 ± 27.91 min; p < 0.001), with comparable blood loss (MLH: 354.63 ±227.96 ml; LAVH: 402.40 ± 224.02 ml; p=0.334), without serious complications when compared to LAVH. Conclusion The technique of MLH should be mastered and encouraged to be used in low-resource setting to get results comparable to laparoscopic surgery. This trial is registered with NCT03548831.

show abstract

Minilaparotomy vs Laparoscopic Hysterectomy: Comparison of Length of Hospital Stay

Perron-Burdick

Calhoun

Idowu

et al. 2014

Journal of Minimally Invasive Gynecology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Minilaparotomy hysterectomy: A worthwhile alternative

Cited by 6 publications

References 22 publications

Comparative Study Between Minilaparotomy Hysterectomy and Laparoscopic Hysterectomy for Benign Uterine Lesions

Comparative Study Between Minilaparotomy Hysterectomy and Laparoscopic Hysterectomy for Benign Uterine Lesions

Feasibility and Compatibility of Minilaparotomy Hysterectomy in a Low-Resource Setting

Minilaparotomy vs Laparoscopic Hysterectomy: Comparison of Length of Hospital Stay

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About