Abdominal hysterectomy should not be considered as a primary method for uterine removal: A prospective randomised study of 100 patients referred to hysterectomy

Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica

Volumn 75, Issue 4, 1996, Pages 404-407

  Langebrekke, Anton ^a   Eraker, Runar ^b   Nesheim, Britt Ingjerd ^b   Urnes, Arne ^b   Busund, Bjørn ^b   Sponland, Geir ^b  

^a AKERSHUS UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (Norway)

^b NONE

Author keywords

Abdominal hysterectomy; Analgesics; Laparoscopically assisted vaginal hysterectomy; Postoperative pain

Indexed keywords

ABDOMINAL HYSTERECTOMY; ARTICLE; CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; FEMALE; HUMAN; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; LAPAROSCOPIC SURGERY; LENGTH OF STAY; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; NORWAY; OPERATION DURATION; POSTOPERATIVE PAIN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; SURGICAL INJURY; SURGICAL TECHNIQUE; VAGINAL HYSTERECTOMY;

FEMALE; HUMANS; HYSTERECTOMY; HYSTERECTOMY, VAGINAL; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 0030066129     PISSN: 00016349     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3109/00016349609033340     Document Type: Article

References (5)

1. Reich H, deCaprio J, McGlynn F. Laparoscopic hysterectomy. J Gynecol Surg 1989; 5: 213.
2. Howard FM, Sanchez R. A comparison of laparoscopically assisted vaginal hysterectomy and abdominal hysterectomy. J Gynecol Surg 1993; 2: 83.
3. Raju KS, Auld BJ. Laparoscopic-assisted vaginal hysterectomy with bilateral oophorectomy versus total abdominal hysterectomy and bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy - implications for gynecological practice in the United Kingdom. J Am Assoc Gynecol Lap 1994; 2: 111.
4. Carter JE, Ryoo J, Katz A. Laparoscopic-assisted vaginal hysterectomy: A case control comparative study with total abdominal hysterectomy. J Am Assoc Gynecol Lap 1994; 2: 116.
5. Wood C, Maher P, Hill D. Current status of laparoscopic associated hysterectomy. Gynaecol Endosc 1994; 3: 75.