Uterine Vascular Occlusion in Management of Leiomyomas: Laparoscopy vs Laparotomy

Wen Ling Lee, Wei Min Liu, Ming Huei Cheng, Hsiang Tai Chao, Jong Ling Fuh, Peng Hui Wang

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

9 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Study Objective: To compare the difference between laparoscopic uterine vessel occlusion (LUVO) and ultra-minilaparotomy (UMLT) uterine vessel occlusion (UVO) in the management of symptomatic uterine myomas with 2-year follow-up. Design: Observational study (Canadian Task Force classification II-3). Setting: University-associated hospital. Patients: Ninety-one patients with symptomatic leiomyoma. Interventions: Uterine vessel occlusion via laparoscopy (n = 51) or UMLT access (n = 40). Measurements and Main Results: Outcome was determined by comparing operative time, complications, successful operation rate, postoperative pain, time to resumption of a regular diet, time to return to work, 2-year symptom control, relapse of symptoms, and repeat intervention between both groups. There were no statistical differences in 2-year symptom control, relapse of symptoms, repeat intervention, surgical complications, and successful operation rate between the 2 groups; however, LUVO yielded shorter operative time, less operative pain, shorter time to resumption of a regular diet, and earlier return to work, compared with UMLT-UVO. Conclusion: If UVO is chosen for management of symptomatic uterine myoma, both the LUVO and UMLT are acceptable options, with similar therapeutic outcomes; however, LUVO might yield more rapid postoperative recovery.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)562-568
Number of pages7
JournalJournal of Minimally Invasive Gynecology
Volume16
Issue number5
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Sep 2009

Fingerprint

Leiomyoma
Laparoscopy
Laparotomy
Blood Vessels
Myoma
Return to Work
Operative Time
Diet
Recurrence
Advisory Committees
Postoperative Pain
Observational Studies
Pain
Therapeutics

Keywords

  • Laparoscopic uterine vessel occlusion
  • Leiomyomas
  • Myomas
  • Ultra-minilaparotomy
  • Uterine vessel occlusion

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Obstetrics and Gynaecology

Cite this

Uterine Vascular Occlusion in Management of Leiomyomas : Laparoscopy vs Laparotomy. / Lee, Wen Ling; Liu, Wei Min; Cheng, Ming Huei; Chao, Hsiang Tai; Fuh, Jong Ling; Wang, Peng Hui.

In: Journal of Minimally Invasive Gynecology, Vol. 16, No. 5, 09.2009, p. 562-568.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Lee, Wen Ling ; Liu, Wei Min ; Cheng, Ming Huei ; Chao, Hsiang Tai ; Fuh, Jong Ling ; Wang, Peng Hui. / Uterine Vascular Occlusion in Management of Leiomyomas : Laparoscopy vs Laparotomy. In: Journal of Minimally Invasive Gynecology. 2009 ; Vol. 16, No. 5. pp. 562-568.
@article{ba3ceb7809a84815888e856658963521,
title = "Uterine Vascular Occlusion in Management of Leiomyomas: Laparoscopy vs Laparotomy",
abstract = "Study Objective: To compare the difference between laparoscopic uterine vessel occlusion (LUVO) and ultra-minilaparotomy (UMLT) uterine vessel occlusion (UVO) in the management of symptomatic uterine myomas with 2-year follow-up. Design: Observational study (Canadian Task Force classification II-3). Setting: University-associated hospital. Patients: Ninety-one patients with symptomatic leiomyoma. Interventions: Uterine vessel occlusion via laparoscopy (n = 51) or UMLT access (n = 40). Measurements and Main Results: Outcome was determined by comparing operative time, complications, successful operation rate, postoperative pain, time to resumption of a regular diet, time to return to work, 2-year symptom control, relapse of symptoms, and repeat intervention between both groups. There were no statistical differences in 2-year symptom control, relapse of symptoms, repeat intervention, surgical complications, and successful operation rate between the 2 groups; however, LUVO yielded shorter operative time, less operative pain, shorter time to resumption of a regular diet, and earlier return to work, compared with UMLT-UVO. Conclusion: If UVO is chosen for management of symptomatic uterine myoma, both the LUVO and UMLT are acceptable options, with similar therapeutic outcomes; however, LUVO might yield more rapid postoperative recovery.",
keywords = "Laparoscopic uterine vessel occlusion, Leiomyomas, Myomas, Ultra-minilaparotomy, Uterine vessel occlusion",
author = "Lee, {Wen Ling} and Liu, {Wei Min} and Cheng, {Ming Huei} and Chao, {Hsiang Tai} and Fuh, {Jong Ling} and Wang, {Peng Hui}",
year = "2009",
month = "9",
doi = "10.1016/j.jmig.2009.06.004",
language = "English",
volume = "16",
pages = "562--568",
journal = "Journal of Minimally Invasive Gynecology",
issn = "1553-4650",
publisher = "Elsevier",
number = "5",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Uterine Vascular Occlusion in Management of Leiomyomas

T2 - Laparoscopy vs Laparotomy

AU - Lee, Wen Ling

AU - Liu, Wei Min

AU - Cheng, Ming Huei

AU - Chao, Hsiang Tai

AU - Fuh, Jong Ling

AU - Wang, Peng Hui

PY - 2009/9

Y1 - 2009/9

N2 - Study Objective: To compare the difference between laparoscopic uterine vessel occlusion (LUVO) and ultra-minilaparotomy (UMLT) uterine vessel occlusion (UVO) in the management of symptomatic uterine myomas with 2-year follow-up. Design: Observational study (Canadian Task Force classification II-3). Setting: University-associated hospital. Patients: Ninety-one patients with symptomatic leiomyoma. Interventions: Uterine vessel occlusion via laparoscopy (n = 51) or UMLT access (n = 40). Measurements and Main Results: Outcome was determined by comparing operative time, complications, successful operation rate, postoperative pain, time to resumption of a regular diet, time to return to work, 2-year symptom control, relapse of symptoms, and repeat intervention between both groups. There were no statistical differences in 2-year symptom control, relapse of symptoms, repeat intervention, surgical complications, and successful operation rate between the 2 groups; however, LUVO yielded shorter operative time, less operative pain, shorter time to resumption of a regular diet, and earlier return to work, compared with UMLT-UVO. Conclusion: If UVO is chosen for management of symptomatic uterine myoma, both the LUVO and UMLT are acceptable options, with similar therapeutic outcomes; however, LUVO might yield more rapid postoperative recovery.

AB - Study Objective: To compare the difference between laparoscopic uterine vessel occlusion (LUVO) and ultra-minilaparotomy (UMLT) uterine vessel occlusion (UVO) in the management of symptomatic uterine myomas with 2-year follow-up. Design: Observational study (Canadian Task Force classification II-3). Setting: University-associated hospital. Patients: Ninety-one patients with symptomatic leiomyoma. Interventions: Uterine vessel occlusion via laparoscopy (n = 51) or UMLT access (n = 40). Measurements and Main Results: Outcome was determined by comparing operative time, complications, successful operation rate, postoperative pain, time to resumption of a regular diet, time to return to work, 2-year symptom control, relapse of symptoms, and repeat intervention between both groups. There were no statistical differences in 2-year symptom control, relapse of symptoms, repeat intervention, surgical complications, and successful operation rate between the 2 groups; however, LUVO yielded shorter operative time, less operative pain, shorter time to resumption of a regular diet, and earlier return to work, compared with UMLT-UVO. Conclusion: If UVO is chosen for management of symptomatic uterine myoma, both the LUVO and UMLT are acceptable options, with similar therapeutic outcomes; however, LUVO might yield more rapid postoperative recovery.

KW - Laparoscopic uterine vessel occlusion

KW - Leiomyomas

KW - Myomas

KW - Ultra-minilaparotomy

KW - Uterine vessel occlusion

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=69449083336&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=69449083336&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.jmig.2009.06.004

DO - 10.1016/j.jmig.2009.06.004

M3 - Article

C2 - 19835798

AN - SCOPUS:69449083336

VL - 16

SP - 562

EP - 568

JO - Journal of Minimally Invasive Gynecology

JF - Journal of Minimally Invasive Gynecology

SN - 1553-4650

IS - 5

ER -