ArticleJournal of robotic surgery2024
Comparison of uterine myometrial thickness at the site of myomectomy scar after surgery using laparoscopic and laparotomy methods.
Article in Journal of robotic surgery, 2024. 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.
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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Fibroids are the most common benign tumours of the uterus, often requiring surgery when symptomatic. This study aims to investigate the impact of surgery using two methods, laparoscopy and laparotomy, on the thickness and vascularity of the uterine myometrium at the site of myomectomy scar (comparing sonographic features at the surgical scar site, including thickness, vascularity, and the extent of fibrotic tissue, in both open and laparoscopic surgical approaches). In this clinical trial, 100 women with type 2-5 fibroids and clinical symptoms, seeking surgery et al. Zahra Hospital, were enrolled in two groups: laparoscopy and laparotomy. Inclusion criteria were a maximum fibroid size of 8 cm and, in the case of multiple fibroids, a maximum of three, with the largest being 8 cm. 6 months post-surgery, sonographic assessments of the myomectomy scar site were compared between both groups. Participants showed no significant differences in demographic and obstetric factors. The most common clinical symptom (87%) in both groups was abnormal uterine bleeding (AUB). The mean hospital stay duration was statistically significantly lower in the laparoscopy group at 1.64 (SD 0.56) compared to 1.89 (SD 0.58) in the laparotomy group (p = 0.028). Additionally, the decrease in haemoglobin levels was 0.89 (SD 0.92) and 1.87 (SD 2.24) units, respectively, which showed a statistically significant difference (p = 0.003). The duration of surgery was significantly shorter in the laparotomy group (p = 0.001). Abdominal pressure was not observed in the laparoscopy group, while 12% of the laparotomy group reported complaints (p = 0.013). Based on the results obtained in this study, it can be concluded that there was no difference between these two methods in terms of improving uterine thickness and associated complications. However, the decrease in haemoglobin levels and the length of hospital stay were lower in patients undergoing laparoscopy.
Indexed as
Identifiers
38926240What 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.