Efficacy of Uterine Manipulator in Total Abdominal Hysterectomy: A Triple-Blinded Randomized Controlled Trial.

IF 1.6 4区 医学 Q3 SURGERY
Pınar Yıldız, Esra Keles, Gazi Yıldız, Pınar Birol İlter, Kasım Turan, Mehmet Mete Kirlangic, Murat Levent Dereli, Fatih Şanlıkan, Batuhan Çağlar, Emre Mat
{"title":"Efficacy of Uterine Manipulator in Total Abdominal Hysterectomy: A Triple-Blinded Randomized Controlled Trial.","authors":"Pınar Yıldız, Esra Keles, Gazi Yıldız, Pınar Birol İlter, Kasım Turan, Mehmet Mete Kirlangic, Murat Levent Dereli, Fatih Şanlıkan, Batuhan Çağlar, Emre Mat","doi":"10.1177/15533506251360840","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>BackgroundThe objective of this study was to investigate whether the advantages of uterine manipulators in laparoscopic hysterectomy could also be applied to abdominal hysterectomy. In the present study, we introduce a novel surgical technique that employs a uterine manipulator during open surgery and analyze the outcomes of this approach.MethodsA prospective, single-center, randomized controlled trial was conducted at a tertiary research hospital with patients who underwent hysterectomy for benign gynecological indications between October 2023 and March 2024. Patients were randomly assigned to either conventional abdominal hysterectomy or manipulator-assisted abdominal hysterectomy. Primary outcomes included operative time, with secondary outcomes including Visual Analog Scale (VAS) pain scores, intraoperative and postoperative complications, and length of hospital stay.ResultsAmong the 142 participants, the manipulator group exhibited a mean operative time of 92.2 ± 11.1 minutes compared to 107.6 ± 14.4 minutes in the control group (<i>P</i> < .001). Length of hospital stay was also significantly shorter in the manipulator group (42.3 ± 14.7 hours vs 47.4 ± 15.8 hours; <i>P</i> = .046). No significant differences were observed in postoperative complications or pain scores between groups. The mean postoperative hemoglobin decrease was significantly lower in the manipulator group (0.74 ± 0.28 g/dL) compared to the control group (1.52 ± 0.33 g/dL) (<i>P</i> < .001).ConclusionThe incorporation of a uterine manipulator in abdominal hysterectomy significantly reduces operative time, colpotomy time, and hospital stay while maintaining a comparable safety profile to conventional techniques. These findings suggest that uterine manipulators may enhance surgical efficiency and could be beneficial in clinical practice.</p>","PeriodicalId":22095,"journal":{"name":"Surgical Innovation","volume":" ","pages":"15533506251360840"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Surgical Innovation","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/15533506251360840","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

BackgroundThe objective of this study was to investigate whether the advantages of uterine manipulators in laparoscopic hysterectomy could also be applied to abdominal hysterectomy. In the present study, we introduce a novel surgical technique that employs a uterine manipulator during open surgery and analyze the outcomes of this approach.MethodsA prospective, single-center, randomized controlled trial was conducted at a tertiary research hospital with patients who underwent hysterectomy for benign gynecological indications between October 2023 and March 2024. Patients were randomly assigned to either conventional abdominal hysterectomy or manipulator-assisted abdominal hysterectomy. Primary outcomes included operative time, with secondary outcomes including Visual Analog Scale (VAS) pain scores, intraoperative and postoperative complications, and length of hospital stay.ResultsAmong the 142 participants, the manipulator group exhibited a mean operative time of 92.2 ± 11.1 minutes compared to 107.6 ± 14.4 minutes in the control group (P < .001). Length of hospital stay was also significantly shorter in the manipulator group (42.3 ± 14.7 hours vs 47.4 ± 15.8 hours; P = .046). No significant differences were observed in postoperative complications or pain scores between groups. The mean postoperative hemoglobin decrease was significantly lower in the manipulator group (0.74 ± 0.28 g/dL) compared to the control group (1.52 ± 0.33 g/dL) (P < .001).ConclusionThe incorporation of a uterine manipulator in abdominal hysterectomy significantly reduces operative time, colpotomy time, and hospital stay while maintaining a comparable safety profile to conventional techniques. These findings suggest that uterine manipulators may enhance surgical efficiency and could be beneficial in clinical practice.

子宫操纵器在腹式全子宫切除术中的疗效:一项三盲随机对照试验。
本研究的目的是探讨子宫机械手在腹腔镜子宫切除术中的优势是否也可以应用于腹部子宫切除术。在本研究中,我们介绍了一种新的手术技术,在开放手术中使用子宫操纵器,并分析了这种方法的结果。方法对2023年10月至2024年3月期间因妇科良性指征行子宫切除术的患者进行前瞻性、单中心、随机对照试验。患者被随机分配到传统的腹部子宫切除术或操作器辅助腹部子宫切除术。主要结局包括手术时间,次要结局包括视觉模拟评分(VAS)疼痛评分、术中和术后并发症以及住院时间。结果142例患者中,机械臂组平均手术时间为92.2±11.1分钟,对照组为107.6±14.4分钟(P < 0.001)。机械臂组住院时间也明显缩短(42.3±14.7小时vs 47.4±15.8小时);P = .046)。两组术后并发症及疼痛评分无显著差异。术后平均血红蛋白下降(0.74±0.28 g/dL)明显低于对照组(1.52±0.33 g/dL) (P < 0.001)。结论子宫操纵器在腹式子宫切除术中可显著减少手术时间、阴道切开时间和住院时间,同时与传统手术方法保持相当的安全性。这些发现提示子宫操纵器可以提高手术效率,在临床实践中可能是有益的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Surgical Innovation
Surgical Innovation 医学-外科
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
72
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Surgical Innovation (SRI) is a peer-reviewed bi-monthly journal focusing on minimally invasive surgical techniques, new instruments such as laparoscopes and endoscopes, and new technologies. SRI prepares surgeons to think and work in "the operating room of the future" through learning new techniques, understanding and adapting to new technologies, maintaining surgical competencies, and applying surgical outcomes data to their practices. This journal is a member of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信