A Retrospective Review of Enseal Laparoscopic Vaginal Assisted Hysterectomy (LAVH) Versus Traditional LAVH

Womens Care

Status: Completed

Conditions: Benign Uterine Disease

Treatments: Procedure: Laparoscopic assisted vaginal hysterectomy

Study type: Observational

Funder types: Other; Industry

Identifiers

NCT01217866

1-44206615

Details and patient eligibility

About

Retrospective charts review from one surgeon to compare Group A- cases where the laparoscopic portion of the case used an EN~SEAL device to Group B - the laparoscopic BSO was done using a 3mm EN-SEAL device through 2 lateral 5mm ports.

Full description

79 women with benign uterine disease underwent laparoscopic assisted vaginal hysterectomy with or without bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy. Subjects charts were divided into two groups based on surgical technique and the following parameters were reviewed retrospectively: surgical time, blood loss, uterine weight, patient weight, patient age, post operative fever >100.4 F, readmission to hospital within one week, return to operating room within 24 hours, length of hospital stay, and blood transfusion. Group A, N=35 used traditional suture technique vaginally. Group B, N=44 used Enseal coagulation cutting device vaginally.

Enrollment: 79 patients

Sex: Female

Ages: 35 to 75 years old

Volunteers: No Healthy Volunteers

Inclusion criteria

• none, observational study

Exclusion criteria

• none, observational study

Trial design

79 participants in 1 patient group

LAVH, techniques

Description:

Women aged 35-75 who underwent laparoscopic assisted vaginal hysterectomy via either suture technique vaginally or Enseal coagulation cutting device vaginally

Treatment:

Procedure: Laparoscopic assisted vaginal hysterectomy