The study was undertaken to compare the efficiency and outcome of laparoscopically assisted vaginal hysterectomy (LAVH), total abdominal hysterectomy (TAH) and vaginal hysterectomy (VH) in terms of operative time, cost, estimated blood loss, hospital stay, quantity of analgesia use, intra- and postoperative complications rate and patients recovery. A total of 750 patients were prospectively collected in the study period from January 2005 through January 2009 in a tertiary care hospital. The mean estimated blood loss in LAVH and VH group were significantly lower compared with the TAH group. As to postoperative pain, significantly less diclofenac was required in the LAVH and VH group vs the TAH group. LAVH, VH is clinically and economically comparable with TAH, with patients' benefits of less estimated blood loss; less analgesia use; less intra- and postoperative complication rates; less postoperative pain; rapid patient recovery and shorter hospital stay. The study concludes that thus, LAVH, VH is clinically and economically comparable with TAH.
Objective:The study was undertaken to compare the efficiency and outcome of Laparoscopic Assisted Vaginal Hysterectomy (LAVH) and Vaginal Hysterectomy (VH) in terms of operative time, cost, estimated blood loss, hospital stay, quantity of analgesia use, intra- and postoperative complication rates and patients recovery.Materials and Methods:A total of 500 diabetic patients were prospectively collected in the study period from January 2005 through January 2009. The performance of LAVH was compared with that of VH, in a tertiary care hospital. The procedures were performed by the same surgeon.Results:There was no significant difference in terms of age, parity, body weight or uterine weight. The mean estimated blood loss in LAVH was significantly lower when compared with the VH group (126.5±39.8 ml and 100±32.8 ml), respectively. As to postoperative pain, less diclofenac was required in the LAVH group compared to the VH group (70.38±13.45 mg and 75.18±16.45 mg), respectively.Conclusions:LAVH, is clinically and economically comparable to VH, with patient benefits of less estimated blood loss, lower quantity of analgesia use, lower rate of intra- and postoperative complications, less postoperative pain, rapid patient recovery, and shorter hospital stay.
Objective: To assess the prevalence and severity of pain in patients with endometriosis and to evaluate the relationship between the severity of pelvic pain with different stages of endometriosis.Methods: A prospective observational study conducted among 65 patients diagnosed with endometriosis during surgery in Infertility Management Center Dhaka, a specialized center for treatment of infertility and assisted reproductive technologies from January 2008 to January 2009.Result: Majority of the patients were between 26-30 years. Pelvic pain was the predominant symptom in 78.5% patients and the rest were asymptomatic. Among the symptomatic patients, most common symptom was dysmenorrhoea (n=47, 92.1%).When severity of pain was graded; it was observed that most (37%) presented with moderate pain. Infertility was present in 85% patients, mostly (n- 47 =74%) in primary sub fertility group. The commonest site of endometriosis was uterosacral ligament (n-58=89%) and ovarian endometriosis is noted in (63%) cases. Most of the lesions (35%) were black, haemosiderin deposits. When r-ASRM staging system was applied, majority (58.4%) of the patients was in stage IV disease and most of the patients (31%) with endometrioma were in stage IV disease. The study revealed a strong positive correlation between severe pain and stage IV disease (Correlation co efficient 0.711). Moderate forms of pain and severity of disease did not show any positive correlation in this study (Correlation co efficient 0.390). There was negative correlation between milder forms of pain with severity of disease.Conclusion: There was no relationship between frequency and severity of pain symptoms and disease stage of endometriosis.J Bangladesh Coll Phys Surg 2016; 34(3): 135-139
Background: Infertility in polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) is one of the leading causes of anovulatory infertility. Ovulation induction is indicated for the management of anovulatory infertility in PCOS and for augmentation of ovulation in ovulatory infertility, in unexplained infertility. The aim of this retrospective study was to compare and determine the efficacy of letrozole administration in infertile women with PCOS to that of infertile women without PCOS by transvaginal sonography. Methods: This retrospective study was done at Centre for Assisted Reproduction (CARE), BIRDEM General Hospital 2 from January to December 2011. Fifty six infertile women including 16 diagnosed as having PCOS and 40 infertile women with regular menstrual cycle (non-PCOS) were included in this study. Patients were treated with letrozole 7.5 mg/day from day 2-6 of the menstrual cycle. Subjects were monitored once during the days 11 to 14 of the cycle by transvaginal ultrasound. Main outcome measures were number of ovulatory follicles, dominant follicle diameter and endometrial thickness. Results: Letrozole as an ovulation inducing drug was found equally effective in terms of follicular recruitment, follicular maturation and endometrial development both in PCOS and non-PCOS women, as there was no significant difference regarding mature follicular development and endometrial response between the two study groups. Association of endometrial response particularly with follicular diameter 18 mm or more among the study groups revealed no statistically significant difference. Conclusion: In conclusion, our results indicate that the effect of letrozole on endometrial thickness and follicular development in patients of anovulatory PCOS did not significantly differ compared to non-PCOS infertile women. Birdem Med J 2019; 9(3): 234-239
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.