Searching the Resource Information Network

Our searching services are busy right now. Please try again later

  • Register
X
Forgot Password

If you have forgotten your password you can enter your email here and get a temporary password sent to your email.

X

Leaving Community

Are you sure you want to leave this community? Leaving the community will revoke any permissions you have been granted in this community.

No
Yes

Safe total intrafascial laparoscopic (TAIL) hysterectomy: a prospective cohort study.

Michael K Hohl | Nik Hauser
Gynecological surgery | 2010

This study directly compares total intrafascial laparoscopic (TAIL) hysterectomy with vaginal (VH) and abdominal (AH) hysterectomy with regard to safety, operating time and time of convalescence. The study is a prospective cohort study (Canadian Task Force classification II-2), including data from patients of a single university-affiliated teaching institution, admitted between 1997 and 2008 for hysterectomy due to benign uterus pathology. Patient data were collected pre-, intra- and postoperatively and complications documented using a standardised data sheet of a Swiss obstetric and gynaecological study group (Arbeitsgemeinschaft Schweizerische Frauenkliniken, Amlikon/Switzerland). Classification of complications (major complications and minor complications) for all three operation techniques, evaluation of surgeons and comparison of operation times and days of hospitalisation were analysed. 3066 patients were included in this study. 993 patients underwent AH, 642 VH and 1,431 total intrafascial hysterectomy. No statistically significant difference for the operation times comparing the three groups can be demonstrated. The mean hospital stay in the TAIL hysterectomy, VH and AH groups is 5.8 +/- 2.4, 8.8 +/- 4.0 and 10.4 +/- 3.9 days, respectively. The postoperative minor complications including infection rates are low in the TAIL hysterectomy group (3.8%) when compared with either the AH group (15.3%) or the VH group (11.2%), respectively. The total of minor complications is statistically significant lower for TAIL hysterectomy as for AH (O.R. 4.52, CI 3.25-6.31) or VH (O.R. 3.16, CI 2.16-4.62). Major haemorrhage with consecutive reoperation is observed statistically significantly more frequent in the AH group when compared to the TAIL hysterectomy group, with an O.R. of 6.13 (CI 3.05-12.62). Overall, major intra- and postoperative complications occur significant more frequently in the AH group (8.6%) when compared to the VH group (3%) and the TAIL hysterectomy group (1.8%). The incidence of major complications applying the standardised TAIL hysterectomy technique is not related to the experience of the surgeons. We conclude that a standardised intrafascial technique of total laparoscopic (TAIL) hysterectomy using an anatomically developed special uterine device is associated with a very low incidence of minor and major intra- and postoperative complications. The direct comparison of complication rates with either vaginal or abdominal hysterectomy favours the total laparoscopic technique, and therefore, this technique can be recommended as a relatively atraumatic procedure. The operation times are comparable for all three techniques without any statistically significant differences. This technique for laparoscopic hysterectomy is shown to be equally safe when applied by experienced gynaecologic surgeons or by residents in training. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s10397-010-0569-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Pubmed ID: 20700518

Research resources used in this publication

None found

Additional research tools detected in this publication

Antibodies used in this publication

None found

Associated grants

None

Publication data is provided by the National Library of Medicine ® and PubMed ®. Data is retrieved from PubMed ® on a weekly schedule. For terms and conditions see the National Library of Medicine Terms and Conditions.

This is a list of tools and resources that we have found mentioned in this publication.


MedCalc (tool)

RRID:SCR_015044

Statistical software for ROC curve analysis. MedCalc performs several statistical tests such as method comparison, method evaluation, reference intervals, and meta-analysis.

View all literature mentions