A prospective comparison of single-port laparoscopically assisted vaginal hysterectomy using transumbilical GelPort access and multiport laparoscopically assisted vaginal hysterectomy

Jung Hun Lee, Joong Sub Choi, Seung Wook Jeon, Chang Eop Son, Jin-Hwa Hong, Jong Woon Bae

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

23 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate the feasibility and safety of single-port laparoscopically assisted vaginal hysterectomy (SP-LAVH) using transumbilical GelPort access. Study design: A prospective case-control study was performed at a University teaching hospital between January 2009 and March 2010, a total of 242 women with a uterus ≤16 weeks gestational size were enrolled in the study. Eighty women underwent SP-LAVH using transumbilical GelPort access (SP-LAVH group), and 162 women underwent conventional multiport LAVH (conventional LAVH group). Results: There were no statistical differences between groups in the patients' demographic characteristics, median operating time (92.5 vs. 90 min; P = 0.479), postoperative changes in hemoglobin concentration (1.4 vs. 1.4 g/dL; P = 0.290), weight of the resected uterus (246 vs. 256 g; P = 0.098), return of bowel activity (37.1 vs. 39.8 h; P = 0.103), hospital stay (3 vs. 3 days; P = 0.554), complication rate (3.8 vs. 4.3%; P = 1.000), and the rate of using an additional trocar or conversion to laparotomy (1.3 vs. 0.6%; P = 0.553). Conclusions: SP-LAVH using transumbilical GelPort access is feasible and safe in women with a uterus ≤16 weeks gestational size. However, a large prospective randomized study is needed to confirm this conclusion and to establish guidelines for the use of SP-LAVH.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)294-297
Number of pages4
JournalEuropean Journal of Obstetrics Gynecology and Reproductive Biology
Volume158
Issue number2
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2011 Oct 1
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Vaginal Hysterectomy
Uterus
Surgical Instruments
Teaching Hospitals
Laparotomy
Case-Control Studies
Length of Stay
Hemoglobins
Demography
Prospective Studies
Guidelines
Safety
Weights and Measures

Keywords

  • Gynecology
  • Laparoscopically assisted vaginal hysterectomy (LAVH)
  • Laparoscopy
  • Single-port surgery

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Obstetrics and Gynaecology
  • Reproductive Medicine

Cite this

A prospective comparison of single-port laparoscopically assisted vaginal hysterectomy using transumbilical GelPort access and multiport laparoscopically assisted vaginal hysterectomy. / Lee, Jung Hun; Choi, Joong Sub; Jeon, Seung Wook; Son, Chang Eop; Hong, Jin-Hwa; Bae, Jong Woon.

In: European Journal of Obstetrics Gynecology and Reproductive Biology, Vol. 158, No. 2, 01.10.2011, p. 294-297.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{bd624f277a6d4818b9c488ab46e3d1aa,
title = "A prospective comparison of single-port laparoscopically assisted vaginal hysterectomy using transumbilical GelPort access and multiport laparoscopically assisted vaginal hysterectomy",
abstract = "Objective: To evaluate the feasibility and safety of single-port laparoscopically assisted vaginal hysterectomy (SP-LAVH) using transumbilical GelPort access. Study design: A prospective case-control study was performed at a University teaching hospital between January 2009 and March 2010, a total of 242 women with a uterus ≤16 weeks gestational size were enrolled in the study. Eighty women underwent SP-LAVH using transumbilical GelPort access (SP-LAVH group), and 162 women underwent conventional multiport LAVH (conventional LAVH group). Results: There were no statistical differences between groups in the patients' demographic characteristics, median operating time (92.5 vs. 90 min; P = 0.479), postoperative changes in hemoglobin concentration (1.4 vs. 1.4 g/dL; P = 0.290), weight of the resected uterus (246 vs. 256 g; P = 0.098), return of bowel activity (37.1 vs. 39.8 h; P = 0.103), hospital stay (3 vs. 3 days; P = 0.554), complication rate (3.8 vs. 4.3{\%}; P = 1.000), and the rate of using an additional trocar or conversion to laparotomy (1.3 vs. 0.6{\%}; P = 0.553). Conclusions: SP-LAVH using transumbilical GelPort access is feasible and safe in women with a uterus ≤16 weeks gestational size. However, a large prospective randomized study is needed to confirm this conclusion and to establish guidelines for the use of SP-LAVH.",
keywords = "Gynecology, Laparoscopically assisted vaginal hysterectomy (LAVH), Laparoscopy, Single-port surgery",
author = "Lee, {Jung Hun} and Choi, {Joong Sub} and Jeon, {Seung Wook} and Son, {Chang Eop} and Jin-Hwa Hong and Bae, {Jong Woon}",
year = "2011",
month = "10",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.ejogrb.2011.05.002",
language = "English",
volume = "158",
pages = "294--297",
journal = "European Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology and Reproductive Biology",
issn = "0028-2243",
publisher = "Elsevier Ireland Ltd",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - A prospective comparison of single-port laparoscopically assisted vaginal hysterectomy using transumbilical GelPort access and multiport laparoscopically assisted vaginal hysterectomy

AU - Lee, Jung Hun

AU - Choi, Joong Sub

AU - Jeon, Seung Wook

AU - Son, Chang Eop

AU - Hong, Jin-Hwa

AU - Bae, Jong Woon

PY - 2011/10/1

Y1 - 2011/10/1

N2 - Objective: To evaluate the feasibility and safety of single-port laparoscopically assisted vaginal hysterectomy (SP-LAVH) using transumbilical GelPort access. Study design: A prospective case-control study was performed at a University teaching hospital between January 2009 and March 2010, a total of 242 women with a uterus ≤16 weeks gestational size were enrolled in the study. Eighty women underwent SP-LAVH using transumbilical GelPort access (SP-LAVH group), and 162 women underwent conventional multiport LAVH (conventional LAVH group). Results: There were no statistical differences between groups in the patients' demographic characteristics, median operating time (92.5 vs. 90 min; P = 0.479), postoperative changes in hemoglobin concentration (1.4 vs. 1.4 g/dL; P = 0.290), weight of the resected uterus (246 vs. 256 g; P = 0.098), return of bowel activity (37.1 vs. 39.8 h; P = 0.103), hospital stay (3 vs. 3 days; P = 0.554), complication rate (3.8 vs. 4.3%; P = 1.000), and the rate of using an additional trocar or conversion to laparotomy (1.3 vs. 0.6%; P = 0.553). Conclusions: SP-LAVH using transumbilical GelPort access is feasible and safe in women with a uterus ≤16 weeks gestational size. However, a large prospective randomized study is needed to confirm this conclusion and to establish guidelines for the use of SP-LAVH.

AB - Objective: To evaluate the feasibility and safety of single-port laparoscopically assisted vaginal hysterectomy (SP-LAVH) using transumbilical GelPort access. Study design: A prospective case-control study was performed at a University teaching hospital between January 2009 and March 2010, a total of 242 women with a uterus ≤16 weeks gestational size were enrolled in the study. Eighty women underwent SP-LAVH using transumbilical GelPort access (SP-LAVH group), and 162 women underwent conventional multiport LAVH (conventional LAVH group). Results: There were no statistical differences between groups in the patients' demographic characteristics, median operating time (92.5 vs. 90 min; P = 0.479), postoperative changes in hemoglobin concentration (1.4 vs. 1.4 g/dL; P = 0.290), weight of the resected uterus (246 vs. 256 g; P = 0.098), return of bowel activity (37.1 vs. 39.8 h; P = 0.103), hospital stay (3 vs. 3 days; P = 0.554), complication rate (3.8 vs. 4.3%; P = 1.000), and the rate of using an additional trocar or conversion to laparotomy (1.3 vs. 0.6%; P = 0.553). Conclusions: SP-LAVH using transumbilical GelPort access is feasible and safe in women with a uterus ≤16 weeks gestational size. However, a large prospective randomized study is needed to confirm this conclusion and to establish guidelines for the use of SP-LAVH.

KW - Gynecology

KW - Laparoscopically assisted vaginal hysterectomy (LAVH)

KW - Laparoscopy

KW - Single-port surgery

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=80053563751&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=80053563751&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2011.05.002

DO - 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2011.05.002

M3 - Article

VL - 158

SP - 294

EP - 297

JO - European Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology and Reproductive Biology

JF - European Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology and Reproductive Biology

SN - 0028-2243

IS - 2

ER -