ArticleFacts, views & vision in ObGyn2022
Total surgical time in laparoscopic supracervical hysterectomy with laparoscopic in-bag-morcellation compared to laparoscopic supracervical hysterectomy with uncontained morcellation.
Article in Facts, views & vision in ObGyn, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Contained Power Morcellation in Laparoscopic Uterine Myoma Surgeries: A Brief Review.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: A possible solution to the problem of cell dissemination through laparoscopic uncontained morcellation during laparoscopic supracervical hysterectomy (LASH) is the use of laparoscopic in-bag morcellation. One criticism regarding the use of in-bag morcellation is the additional surgical time associated with this procedure. Objectives: In this retrospective study we compared the total surgical time in LASH with laparoscopic in-bag morcellation (107 cases from 2016-2018) and LASH with uncontained morcellation (47 cases from 2015-2017). Materials and Methods: All surgeries were performed in the same department of minimally invasive gynaecological surgery by a total of three experienced surgeons for the indication of bleeding disorder and / or dysmenorrhea. Main outcome measure: We measured and compared total surgical time, surgical outcome, blood loss and complications in LASH with in-bag morcellation and with uncontained morcellation. Results: Total surgical time in both procedures do not show a significant difference. Considering the learning curve in laparoscopic bag use, the total surgical time in LASH with laparoscopic in-bag morcellation is shorter than total surgical time in LASH with uncontained morcellation. Laparoscopic in-bag morcellation consumes time for bag use and handling, but saves time as it eliminates the need for meticulous sampling of lost tissue fragments and the complex lavage of the peritoneal cavity after morcellation. There is no difference between both groups in terms of blood loss, complications and surgical results. Conclusion / What is new?: We conclude that LASH with in-bag morcellation is not related to additional surgical time when compared to LASH with uncontained morcellation.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.