ArticleFacts, views & vision in ObGyn2024
Opportunities for change and levelling up: a trust wide retrospective analysis of 8 years of laparoscopic and abdominal myomectomy.
Article in Facts, views & vision in ObGyn, 2024. 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.
- Why Hysterectomy Algorithms Diverge from Clinical Practice: A Romanian Cohort Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Laparoscopic myomectomy is increasingly considered the gold standard uterine preserving procedure and has well documented benefits over the open approach. Barriers that women have in accessing the most appropriate treatment need to be addressed to ensure optimal patient care and outcomes. Objectives: To analyse rates of open and laparoscopic myomectomy at a large NHS trust and identify how many cases could potentially have been performed laparoscopically, and any variation between sites. Materials and Methods: A retrospective review of preoperative imaging reports and a surgical database containing information for all myomectomies performed between 1st January 2015 and 31st December 2022. Main outcome measures: Number of procedures suitable for alternative surgical approach; length of hospital stay; estimated blood loss; cost differences. Results: 846 myomectomies were performed; 656 by laparotomy and 190 by laparoscopy. 194/591 (32.8%) open myomectomies could have been performed laparoscopically and 26/172 (15.1%) laparoscopic myomectomies may have been better performed via an open approach. Length of hospital stay, and estimated blood loss were significantly higher in the open group. Had cases been performed as indicated by pre-operative imaging, the cost differences ranged from -£115,752 to £251,832. Conclusions: There is disparity in access to the gold standard care of laparoscopic myomectomy. Due to multifactorial reasons, even at sites where the rate of laparoscopic myomectomy is high, there is still underutilisation of this approach. It is clear that there is scope for change and "levelling up" of this imbalance. What is new?: Robust pathways and guidelines must be developed, and more laparoscopic surgeons should be trained to optimise care for women with fibroids.
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.