Skip to main content

Advertisement

Table 1 Laparoscopic-assisted vaginal hysterectomy (LAVH) ±  lymphadenectomy (LAE) vs. laparotomy ± LAE in the treatment of early endometrial cancer

From: Laparoscopic-assisted vaginal hysterectomy with laparoscopic pelvic and paraaortic staging for early endometrial cancer

Reference n (LAVH/laparotomy) Results and authors’ conclusions
[31] 13/17 Significant cost savings, improved quality of life
[32] 29/64 Fewer complications, shortened hospital stay
[33] 69/251 Fewer complications, shorter hospitalization
[34] 19/17 Less pain, improved quality of life, total costs statistically not different
[35] 65/65 LAVH in early endometrial cancer feasible, also in obese patients
[36] 86/57 Shorter hospitalization, earlier recovery, higher financial cost
[37] 67/45 Increased OR time, shorter stay
[38] 96/24 Attractive alternative, shorter recovery time
[18] 52/46 Reduced blood loss, shorter hospital stay
[14] 600 Review article, laparoscopic-assisted surgical staging as safe as open procedure
[39] 226/284 Eleven conversions from total laparoscopic hysterectomy to laparotomy, similar clinical course, similar recurrence rates
[40] 47/31 Morbidly obese patients (mean weight 118.7 kg), five conversions from total laparoscopic hysterectomy to laparotomy, significantly fewer wound infections in the laparoscopy group
[41] 63/59 Fewer postoperative complications in the LAVH group—especially in patients with comorbidity
[42] 41/36 Longer duration of surgery, but shorter hospital stay for LAVH
[43] 74/168 Higher number of lymph nodes, fewer postoperative complications, and shorter hospital stay for LAVH
[44] 38/37 More postoperative complications in the laparotomy group, shorter hospital stay for LAVH group
[45] 20/36 Longer operating time, less blood loss, and shorter hospital stay for LAVH