NCT01217866

A Retrospective Review of Enseal Laparoscopic Vaginal Assisted Hysterectomy (LAVH) Versus Traditional LAVH

A Retrospective Analysis of a Complete Enseal Laparoscopic Vaginal Assisted Hysterectomy Versus a Traditional Suture Laparoscopic Vaginal Hysterectomy

• Status: Completed
• Phase: —
• Study type: Observational
• Enrollment: 79 (actual)
• Sponsor: Womens Care · Academic / Other
• Sex: Female
• Age: 35 Years – 75 Years
• Healthy volunteers: Not accepted

Summary

Retrospective charts review from one surgeon to compare Group A- cases where the laparoscopic portion of the case used an EN\~SEAL device to Group B - the laparoscopic BSO was done using a 3mm EN-SEAL device through 2 lateral 5mm ports.

Detailed description

79 women with benign uterine disease underwent laparoscopic assisted vaginal hysterectomy with or without bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy. Subjects charts were divided into two groups based on surgical technique and the following parameters were reviewed retrospectively: surgical time, blood loss, uterine weight, patient weight, patient age, post operative fever \>100.4 F, readmission to hospital within one week, return to operating room within 24 hours, length of hospital stay, and blood transfusion. Group A, N=35 used traditional suture technique vaginally. Group B, N=44 used Enseal coagulation cutting device vaginally.

Conditions

• Benign Uterine Disease

Interventions

Type	Name	Description
PROCEDURE	Laparoscopic assisted vaginal hysterectomy	Surgical removal of uterus vaginally

Timeline

• Start date: 2010-08-01
• Primary completion: 2011-02-01
• Completion: 2011-02-01
• First posted: 2010-10-08
• Last updated: 2012-12-20