Laparoscopic Assistance for Extended Radicality of Radical Vaginal Hysterectomy: Description of a Technique

Possover, Marc; Krause, Norman; Kühne-Heid, R; Schneider, Achim

doi:10.1006/gyno.1998.5040

Cited by 53 publications

(27 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…2 In addition, pathological assessment of the specimens has shown that LARVH is a less radical procedure compared with RAH, and this may explain some of the differences in surgical outcomes. To date, although several authors have claimed a similar extent of radicality for total laparoscopic radical hysterectomy 10 and extended laparoscopic radical hysterectomy 11 compared with the open procedure, there are no such data for a 'standard' LARVH, and its radicality has been questioned. 12 Our data support the suggestion that it is a less radical procedure.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Laparoscopic assisted radical vaginal hysterectomy versus radical abdominal hysterectomy—a randomised phase II trial: perioperative outcomes and surgicopathological measurements

Naik

Jackson

Lopes

et al. 2010

BJOG

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective To evaluate perioperative surgical outcomes and resection size for laparoscopically assisted radical vaginal hysterectomy (LARVH) compared with radical abdominal hysterectomy (RAH).Design A prospective randomised phase II trial.Population Early stage IB cervical cancer requiring radical surgical treatment.Setting Northern Gynaecological Oncology Centre, Gateshead, UK.Methods Fifteen women were randomised to LARVH and to RAH.Main outcome measures Outcomes included requirement in days for bladder catheterisation after surgery, operating time, blood loss, hospital stay, opiate pain relief, complication rate, time to normal activities and resection size of major ligaments and vaginal cuff.Results Statistically significant differences were found between LARVH and RAH, respectively: median duration of bladder catheterisation, 4 days versus 21 days (P = 0.003); median operating time, 180 minutes versus 138 minutes (P = 0.05); median blood loss, 400 ml versus 1000 ml (P = 0.05), median hospital stay, 5 days versus 7 days (P = 0.04) and median opiate requirement in the first 36 hours postoperatively, 30 mg versus 53 mg (P = 0.004). The mean resected lengths for LARVH versus RAH, respectively, were: mean resected vaginal cuff, 1.26 cm versus 2.16 cm (P = 0.014); mean resected cardinal ligament length, 1.30 cm versus 2.79 cm (P = 0.013) and mean resected uterosacral ligament length, 1.47 cm versus 4.68 cm (P = 0.034).Conclusions This study confirms the short-term surgical benefits of LARVH. In addition, LARVH has been shown to be a less radical procedure than RAH, supporting the need for strict patient selection and to restrict the procedure to small tumours.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Laparoscopic assisted radical vaginal hysterectomy versus radical abdominal hysterectomy—a randomised phase II trial: perioperative outcomes and surgicopathological measurements

Naik

Jackson

Lopes

et al. 2010

BJOG

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…From May 1996 to May 1997, we performed laparoscopically assisted radical vaginal hysterectomy (LARVH) type III [7] conventionally (group A, n = 23), disregarding the splanchnic pelvic nerves because their location was not known to us. In addition, we also did not reestablish support for the vagina and rectum.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Slow-transit constipation after radical hysterectomy type III

Possover

Schneider

2002

Surgical Endoscopy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Laparoscopically assisted radical vaginal hysterectomy (LARVH) offers a valid alternative to laparotomic hysterectomy with apparent advantages, e.g., decreased blood loss during surgery, shorter hospital stays, quicker convalescence, and improved cosmetic results, while at the same time delivering equal oncological outcome data [9,18,22,23,25,37,[40][41][42][43]. This led to the presumption that the toxicity profile of LAVRH followed by adjuvant (chemo)radiation might also be favorable compared to that of laparotomic radical hysterectomy followed by (chemo)radiation.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The oncologic outcome of laparoscopically assisted techniques is considered equal to that of laparotomic hysterectomy [9,18,22,23,25,37,[40][41][42][43].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Adjuvant chemoradiation after laparoscopically assisted vaginal radical hysterectomy (LARVH) in patients with cervical cancer

et al. 2011

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Laparoscopic Assistance for Extended Radicality of Radical Vaginal Hysterectomy: Description of a Technique

Cited by 53 publications

References 8 publications

Laparoscopic assisted radical vaginal hysterectomy versus radical abdominal hysterectomy—a randomised phase II trial: perioperative outcomes and surgicopathological measurements

Laparoscopic assisted radical vaginal hysterectomy versus radical abdominal hysterectomy—a randomised phase II trial: perioperative outcomes and surgicopathological measurements

Slow-transit constipation after radical hysterectomy type III

Adjuvant chemoradiation after laparoscopically assisted vaginal radical hysterectomy (LARVH) in patients with cervical cancer

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About