38
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: not found
      • Article: not found

      Laparoscopic versus abdominal myomectomy: A prospective, randomized trial to evaluate benefits in early outcome

      , , , , ,
      American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology
      Elsevier BV

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Our purpose was to investigate the advantages of laparoscopic myomectomy versus laparotomy. A prospective, randomized trial was performed on 40 women, 22 to 44 years old, undergoing myomectomy. Patients were randomized to have laparoscopy (n=20) or laparotomy (n=20). The intensity of pain was assessed by a visual analog scale at 0, 1, 2, and 3 days postoperatively. The proportions of patients who were analgesic free on day 2, discharged from the hospital by day 3, and feeling fully recuperated on day 15 were also compared. The intensity of postoperative pain was lower (p<0.05) after laparoscopy than after laparotomy. A higher (p<0.05) proportion of patients was analgesic free on day 2, discharged from hospital by day 3, and feeling fully recuperated on day 15 after laparoscopy compared with laparotomy. Laparoscopic myomectomy may offer the benefits of lower postoperative pain and shorter recovery time in comparison with laparotomy.

          Related collections

          Author and article information

          Journal
          American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology
          American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology
          Elsevier BV
          00029378
          February 1996
          February 1996
          : 174
          : 2
          : 654-658
          Article
          10.1016/S0002-9378(96)70445-3
          8623802
          c169c25f-475f-4e71-91b0-4b84c62b84ae
          © 1996

          https://www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/

          History

          Comments

          Comment on this article