ArticleEuropean journal of obstetrics & gynecology and reproductive biology: X2023
Obvious advantage of vaginal natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery hysterectomy against total laparoscopic hysterectomy in small uterus patients and the future prospects at a regional core institution: A retrospective study.
Article in European journal of obstetrics & gynecology and reproductive biology: X, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Owing to the combination of benefits, including permanent visual guidance and no abdominal skin incision, vaginal natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery hysterectomy (vNOTES-H) is currently widely used. However, the introduction of vNOTES-H has been delayed in many Japanese regional core hospitals because of its specific device and skill requirements. Therefore, the characteristics and advantages should be explained for the widespread use of this technique. Study design: We reviewed the medical records of 17 patients with vNOTES-H and 94 patients with total laparoscopic hysterectomy (TLH) from January 1, 2015 to December 31, 2022. In this analysis, to compare the results of vNOTES-H to TLH, we excluded certain patients with a relatively heavy uterus (>255 g) and the presence of abdominal adhesions. In this report, first, the characteristics of the vNOTES-H procedures using a transvaginal access platform are explained by referring to one representative patient. Second, the patient characteristics of the vNOTES-H and TLH groups, including operation time and blood loss amount, were compared. Then, to detect the influence of vNOTES-H on the difficulty of operation among all 111 patients, we performed a multivariate logistic regression analysis to assess the influence of each of 9 factors, including "vNOTES-H", "Advanced age", "High BMI", "3 parity", "Gynaecological operation history", "Adenomyoma", "Large leiomyoma", "Heavy uterus" and "Large uterus", on the two indexes, including "Short time operation" and "Massive blood loss". Results: In the simple comparison between the groups with vNOTES-H and TLH, the operation time in the former group was significantly shorter than in the latter group, although other factors did not show significant differences, including blood loss amount. Moreover, in the multivariate logistic regression analysis of all 111 patients, the "vNOTES-H" factor showed a significantly high possibility of "short time operation", although no factor, including "vNOTES-H", showed a significant influence on "massive blood loss". Conclusions: vNOTES-H showed advantages in terms of operation time without increasing blood loss for patients with a relatively small uterus. However, to expand the selection for vNOTES-H, we should accumulate further patients and perform more analyses.
Indexed as
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.