Laparoscopic-assisted Radical Vaginal Hysterectomy Research Articles

Effect of laparoscopic-assisted transvaginal hysterectomy on wound complications in patients with early stage cervical cancer: A meta-analysis.

Laparoscopic-assisted vaginal radical hysterectomy (LARVH) and abdominal radical hysterectomy (ARH) have been widely applied to treat cervical carcinoma. But LARVH and ARH have not been fully investigated in treating cervical carcinoma after injury associated with injury. This research is intended to provide an up-to-date basis for comparing LARVH with ARH in early stage cervical carcinoma. Comparison between LARVH and ARH in cervical carcinoma was carried out through a combination of related research. Eligible articles from databases such as PubMed and Embase were screened using an established search strategy. This report covered the results of LARVH versus ARH in cervical carcinoma. The average difference and the 95% confidence interval (CI) were used for the combination of consecutive variables. The combination of categorical variables was performed with the odds ratio (OR) 95% confidence interval. Through the identification of 1137 publications, eight of them were chosen to be analysed. Among them, 363 were treated with LARVH and 326 were treated with ARH. Eight trials showed that LARVH was associated with a reduced risk of postoperative wound infection than ARH (OR, 0.23; 95% CI, 0.1-0.55, p = 0.0009). Five trials showed that there was no difference in the risk of postoperative bleeding after surgery (OR, 1.17; 95% CI, 0.42-3.29, p = 0.76). We also did not differ significantly in the duration of the surgery (OR, 1.79; 95% CI, -6.58 to 10.15, p = 0.68). So, the two surgical methods differ significantly only in the risk of postoperative wound infection.

Radical Hysterectomy After the LACC Trial: Back to Radical Vaginal Surgery

Classical radical vaginal hysterectomy first performed by Anton Pawlik in Prague in 1888 and popularized by Frederic Schauta is now a historical technique virtually abandoned due to painful perineal incision, a high rate of urinary dysfunction, and the inability to perform lymph node assessment. However, the heritage of this approach has been still used and taught in a few centers outside their Austrian birthplace. A combined vaginal and laparoscopic approach was developed in the 1990s by French and German surgeons who designed diverse surgical techniques for which a novel classification is proposed. All these techniques are different from the so-called laparoscopically assisted radical vaginal hysterectomy (LARVH), a term widely used for laparoscopic radical hysterectomies with vaginal extraction of the specimen. Interestingly, after the publication of the LACC trial (Laparoscopic Approach to Cervical Cancer), the radical vaginal approach has found a very timely application. The creation of a vaginal cuff before performing radical laparoscopic hysterectomy described in 2007 by Leblanc as "Schautheim" operation can be used as a protective maneuver to avoid tumor spillage and potentially overturn the negative outcome of minimally invasive surgery in early-stage cervical cancer. As a result, the combination of radical vaginal and laparoscopic steps of surgery is one possible evolution after the LACC trial that needs further investigation. The forgotten vaginal surgical technique needs a specific learning curve. The creation of a vaginal cuff should be mastered by every gynecological oncologist.

Radical Vaginal Trachelectomy.

Recently, radical vaginal hysterectomy (RVH) has developed into laparoscopically assisted radical vaginal hysterectomy (LARVH), which is associated with the laparoscopical procedure, and it is applied as radical vaginal trachelectomy and semi-radical vaginal hysterectomy. LARVH is indicated for patients with stage IB1 and IIA1 cervical carcinoma, especially those with a tumor size of less than 2 cm, because the cardinal ligaments cannot be resected widely. Although RVH that is associated with laparoscopic pelvic lymphadenectomy is the most used surgical procedure, radical trachelectomy may be performed either abdominally or vaginally (laparoscopic or robotic). One report found that the pregnancy rate was higher in patients who underwent minimally invasive or radical vaginal trachelectomy than in those who underwent radical abdominal trachelectomy.

Oncological Results of Laparoscopically Assisted Radical Vaginal Hysterectomy in Early-Stage Cervical Cancer: Should We Really Abandon Minimally Invasive Surgery?

Simple SummarySome recently published studies in early-stage cervical cancer patients have shown that minimally invasive surgery (MIS), including laparoscopic and robotic approaches, might offer lower survival rates than classic open surgery. We evaluated the oncological results of a series of patients treated by laparoscopically assisted radical vaginal hysterectomy (LARVH), an infrequently used MIS technique. We included 115 patients with early-stage cervical cancer (IA1 with lymphovascular invasion, IA2, IB1, and IIA < 2 cm; International Federation of Gynecology (FIGO), 2008). The 3- and 4.5-year disease-free survival rates were 96.7% and 93.5%, respectively, and the overall survival was 97.8% and 94.8%, respectively. These survival data are comparable with those reported with the open radical hysterectomy but presented the advantages of MIS. LARVH offers excellent disease control in women with early-stage cervical cancer and can be considered as an adequate MIS alternative to open radical hysterectomy.Background: Recent evidence indicates that some minimally invasive surgery approaches, such as laparoscopic and robotic-assisted radical hysterectomy, offer lower survival rates to patients with early-stage cervical cancer than open radical hysterectomy. We evaluated the oncological results of a different minimally invasive surgery approach, that of laparoscopically assisted radical vaginal hysterectomy (LARVH) in this setting. Methods: From January 2001 to December 2018, patients with early-stage cervical cancer were treated by LARVH. Colpotomy and initial closure of the vagina were performed following the Schauta operation, avoiding manipulation of the tumor. Laparoscopic sentinel lymph node (SLN) biopsy was performed in all cases. Women treated between 2001 and 2011 also underwent pelvic lymphadenectomy. Results: There were 115 patients included. Intraoperative complications occurred in nine patients (7.8%). After a median follow-up of 87.8 months (range 1–216), seven women (6%) presented recurrence. Four women died (mortality rate 3.4%). The 3- and 4.5-year disease-free survival rates were 96.7% and 93.5%, respectively, and the overall survival was 97.8% and 94.8%, respectively. Conclusion: LARVH offers excellent disease-free and overall survival in women with early-stage cervical cancer and can be considered as an adequate minimally invasive surgery alternative to open radical hysterectomy.

Evaluation of the efficacy of laparoscopic-assisted radical vaginal hysterectomy and abdominal radical hysterectomy for treating cervical cancer: a meta-analysis.

IntroductionLaparoscopic-assisted radical vaginal hysterectomy (LARVH) and abdominal radical hysterectomy (ARH) are commonly used for cervical cancer treatment. However, the clinical application of LARVH versus ARH in treating cervical cancer remains controversial.AimTo investigate the efficacy of LARVH versus ARH in treating cervical cancer via comparing several inductors by pooling related studies.Material and methodsEligible articles from PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane library were screened using established search terms. Consecutive variables were pooled using weighted mean difference (WMD) and 95% confidence interval (CI). Categorical variables were pooled using odds ratio (OR) and 95% CI.ResultsA total of 13 articles were included in this meta-analysis, comprising 579 patients who underwent LARVH and 810 who underwent ARH. LARVH required a longer operation time (WMD = 50.97, 95% CI: 38.34, 63.59, p < 0.001) than ARH. However, compared to patients who underwent ARH, those who underwent LARVH had less bleeding volume (WMD = −311.21, 95% CI: −482.77, −139.64, p < 0.001), required a shorter hospital stay (WMD = −3.38, 95% CI: −5.00, −1.76, p < 0.001), and had a lower risk of urinary tract infection (OR = 0.34, 95% CI: 0.13, 0.89, p = 0.028). Additionally, patients who underwent LARVH showed a slightly lower recurrence rate (OR = 0.549, 95% CI: 0.302, 0.998, p = 0.049) than patients who underwent ARH. However, subgroup analysis results were not in agreement with the pooled results and indicated an unstable outcome.ConclusionsOwing to these reasons, LARVH has more application prospects than ARH in treating cervical cancer.

Predictive factors of severe perioperative morbidity of radical hysterectomy with lymphadenectomy in early-stage cervical cancer: A French prospective multicentric cohort of 248 patients

ObjectiveThe purpose of this study was to assess the postoperative morbidity after radical hysterectomy (RH) for early-stage cervical cancer and to determine risk factors of severe perioperative morbidity. MethodsData of two prospective trials on sentinel node biopsy for cervical cancer (SENTICOL I & II) were analysed. Patients having a radical hysterectomy were included between 2005 and 2012 from 25 French oncologic centers. Postoperative complications were prospectively recorded in a pre-specified analysis. Results248 patients met the inclusion criteria. The median age was 44.5 years [25–85]. 88.7% of patients had a stage IB1 disease. There were 71.4% epidermoid carcinomas and 25% adenocarcinomas. 125 patients (50.4%) had a laparoscopic-assisted vaginal RH, 88 patients (35.5%) had a total laparoscopic RH, 26 patients (10.5%) had an open RH and 9 patients (3.6%) had a robotic-assisted RH. Sixteen patients (6.4%) had intraoperative complications. On a multivariate analysis, intraoperative complications were significantly associated with BMI >30 kg/m2. The urinary, lymphovascular and neurologic complications rates were respectively 34.3%, 20.6% and 19.8%. 31 patients (12.5%) had severe postoperative complications (Clavien-Dindo ≥ 3 or CTCAE ≥ 3). On multivariate analysis, severe postoperative complications were associated with parametrial involvement, preoperative brachytherapy and inclusion in low surgical skills center. ConclusionsThis study based on prospective data showed that RH has low severe postoperative complications. The main complications were urinary infections and lower limb lymphedema. Patients with early-stage cervical cancer should be referred to expert center to ensure best surgical outcomes.

Self-Reported Long-Term Autonomic Function After Laparoscopic Total Mesometrial Resection for Early-Stage Cervical Cancer: A Multicentric Study.

This multicentric retrospective study investigates the early and long-term self-reported urinary, bowel, and sexual dysfunctions in early-stage cervical cancer patients who submitted to laparoscopic total mesometrial resection (L-TMMR), total laparoscopic radical hysterectomy, vaginal-assisted laparoscopic radical hysterectomy, and laparoscopic-assisted radical vaginal hysterectomy. Cervical cancer patients, FIGO (International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics) stage IA2-IB1/IIA1 who submitted to nerve-sparing radical hysterectomy were recruited. Pelvic functions were assessed within 30 days (early outcome) and 12 months after surgery (long-term outcome). Two hundred thirteen subjects receiving nerve-sparing radical hysterectomy were enrolled. Laparoscopic total mesometrial resection was performed in 46 patients (21.6%), total laparoscopic radical hysterectomy in 65 patients (30.5%), vaginal-assisted laparoscopic radical hysterectomy in 54 patients (25.4%), and laparoscopic-assisted radical vaginal hysterectomy in 48 women (22.5%). Operative time was significantly lower in the L-TMMR group (240 minutes; range, 120-670 minutes; P = 0.001). The overall perioperative complication rate was 11.3%, with no statistically significant differences among the 4 groups. Stress incontinence and sensation of bladder incomplete emptying were detected, respectively, in 54 patients (25.6%) and 65 patients (30.7%) with a significantly lower prevalence among those in the L-TMMR group, which resulted, respectively, in 11.1% (P = 0.022) and 13.3% (P = 0.036). The prevalence rates of constipation, sensation of incomplete bowel emptying, and effort during evacuation were significantly higher among those in the L-TMMR group, resulting in, respectively, 37% (P = 0.001), 42.3% (P = 0.012), and 50% (P = 0.039). One hundred forty-nine patients (70%) were sexually active. Fifty-eight women (38.9%) reported low enjoyment, 83 women (55.7%) medium enjoyment, and 8 women (5.4%) reported high enjoyment, without statistically significant differences among the 4 groups. Laparoscopic total mesometrial resection is associated with improved long-term urinary autonomic functions and worse gastrointestinal autonomic outcome. Further larger prospective trials are needed to evaluate both the oncological and functional outcomes in order to establish the most appropriate surgical approach for early-stage cervical cancer patients.

Vaginal-assisted laparoscopic radical hysterectomy (VALRH) versus laparoscopic-assisted radical vaginal hysterectomy (LARVH) in the treatment of cervical cancer: surgical results and oncologic outcome

The aim of this study was to compare the morbidity and survival rates of patients with early-stage cervical cancer treated by vaginal-assisted laparoscopic radical hysterectomy (VALRH) with pair-matched laparoscopic-assisted vaginal radical hysterectomy (LARVH) controls. One hundred nine patients who underwent VALRH for cervical cancer stage FIGO Ia1, L1 to IIb between 2007 and 2009 and 200 patients who underwent LARVH between 1994 and 2002 were analysed in their entirety and in a group of matched pairs. In both groups, there was no conversion to laparotomy due to an intraoperative complication. Prevalence of blood transfusions was significantly lower in the VALRH group (2 vs. 39 patients; P < 0.001). Bladder function resumed sooner (P < 0.001), and patients were discharged earlier after VALRH (P < 0.001). There were no intraoperative injuries in the VALRH group. In the LARVH group, the most common intraoperative injury occurred to the bladder (7.0 %). Postoperatively, the most common complication in the VALRH group was ureterovaginal fistula (2.7 %) and fever (2.7 %) and in the LARVH ureterostenosis (3.5 %), uretero/bladder fistula (1 %), and fever (7 %). For patients with tumour stage Ib1 the 5-year recurrence-free survival was 92.8 % and 5-year overall survival 95.2 % following VALRH and 88.2 and 90.5 %, respectively, following LARVH. No significant difference in the survival rate was found (log rank, P = 0.740). VALRH is a feasible and oncologically safe surgical option for patients with early-stage cervical cancer. We believe the complication rate is lowered in VALRH by the combination of the laparoscopic and vaginal approach.

Laparoscopically assisted radical vaginal hysterectomy versus radical abdominal hysterectomy for the treatment of early cervical cancer

Cervical cancer is the second most common cancer among women and is the most frequent cause of death from gynaecological cancers worldwide. Standard surgical management for selected early-stage cervical cancer is radical hysterectomy. Traditionally, radical hysterectomy has been carried out via the abdominal route and this remains the gold standard surgical management of early cervical cancer. In recent years, advances in minimal access surgery have made it possible to perform radical hysterectomy with the use of laparoscopy with the aim of reducing the surgical morbidity and promoting a faster recovery. To compare the effectiveness and safety of laparoscopically assisted radical vaginal hysterectomy (LARVH) and radical abdominal hysterectomy (RAH) in women with early-stage (1 to 2A) cervical cancer. We searched the Cochrane Gynaecological Cancer Group Trials Register, and Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) Issue 7, 2013, MEDLINE, and EMBASE up to July 2013. We also searched registers of clinical trials, abstracts of scientific meetings, reference lists of included studies and contacted experts in the field. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared laparoscopically assisted radical hysterectomy and radical abdominal hysterectomy, in adult women diagnosed with early (stage 1 to 2A) cervical cancer. Two review authors independently abstracted data and assessed risk of bias. We found one RCT, which included 13 women, that met our inclusion criteria and this trial reported data on LARVH versus RAH.Women who underwent LARVH for treatment of early-stage cervical cancer appeared to have less blood loss compared with those who underwent RAH. The trial reported a borderline significant difference between the two types of surgery (median blood loss 400 mL (interquartile range (IQR): 325 to 1050) and 1000 mL (IQR: 800 to 1025) for LARVH and RAH, respectively, P value = 0.05). RAH was associated with significantly shorter operation time compared with LARVH (median: 180 minutes with LARVH versus 138 minutes with RAH, P value = 0.05).There was no statistically significant difference in the risk of perioperative complications in women who underwent LARVH and RAH. The trial reported two (29%) and four (57%) cases of intraoperative and postoperative complications, respectively, in the LARVH group and no (0%) reported cases of intraoperative complications and five (83%) cases of postoperative complications in the RAH group. There were no reported cases of severe perioperative complications.Bladder and bowel dysfunction of either a transient or chronic nature remain major morbidities after radical hysterectomy, and the one included study showed that there may be significantly less after LARVH. The included trial lacked statistical power due to the small number of women in each group and the low number of observed events. Therefore, the absence of reliable evidence, regarding the effectiveness and safety of the two surgical techniques for the management of early-stage cervical cancer, precludes any definitive guidance or recommendations for clinical practice. The trial did not report data on long-term outcomes, but was at moderate risk of bias due to very low numbers of included women.

Analysis of clinical application of laparoscopic-assisted vaginal radical hysterectomy and pelvic lymphadenectomy in 63 patients with early-stage cervical cancer

Objective To investigate the clinical effect and safety of laparoscopic-assisted vaginal radical hysterectomy (LAVRH) and pelvic lymphadenectomy in early-stage cervical cancer.Methods The clinical data of 126 patients with cervical cancer were retrospectively analyzed.63 cases received LAVRH surgery were considered as study group,and 63 cases received laparotomy were selected as control group.The operation time,intraoperative blood loss,intestinal function recovery time,the average hospitalization days,surgical complications,recurrence incidence,etc were compared between the two groups.Results The operation time,intraoperative blood loss,intestinal function recovery time,the average hospitalization days had significantly statistical differences between two groups(P ＜0.05).The surgical complications and recurrence rate had no significantly statistical differences between two groups (P ＞0.05).Conclusion LAVRH and pelvic lymphadenectomy has the advantages of minimally invasive,less blood loss,faster recovery,etc.It is an effective method for the treatment of early-stage cervical cancer. Key words: Laparoscopy ; Cervical cancer; Radical hysterectomy ; Lymphadenectomy

Comparison of laparoscopic-assisted radical vaginal hysterectomy and laparoscopic radical hysterectomy in the treatment of cervical cancer

Comparison of laparoscopic-assisted radical vaginal hysterectomy and laparoscopic radical hysterectomy in the treatment of cervical cancer

Comparison of Laparoscopic-Assisted Radical Vaginal Hysterectomy and Laparoscopic Radical Hysterectomy in the Treatment of Cervical Cancer

The aim of this study was to compare the surgical and oncologic outcomes of laparoscopic-assisted radical vaginal hysterectomy (LARVH) with that of laparoscopic radical hysterectomy (LRH) for early-stage cervical cancer. Patients affected by invasive cervical cancer (FIGO stage I-IIA) who had received LARVH (n=89) in our institute between September 2004 and December 2010 were compared with patients treated by LRH (n=105) during the same period. All patient information, surgical and pathological data, and oncological results were prospectively collected. Patients undergoing abdominal radical hysterectomy (ARH) were included for comparison of safety, morbidity, and recurrence rate. The mean estimated blood loss (EBL) and return of bowel activity were significantly reduced in the LRH group compared with the LARVH group (p=.011 and p=.002, respectively). Intraoperative complications occurred in 10 patients (11.2%) in the LARVH group, 6 (5.7%) in the LRH group, and 3 (3.0%) in the ARH group. Forest plot analyses of the previous studies showed higher incidence of intraoperative complication in the LARVH group than in LRH group (p=.02). Despite the similar overall recurrence rate, stump recurrence seems to be high in the LRH group in the forest plot analysis of previous studies (p=0.08). Both LARVH and LRH are safe and effective therapeutic procedures for the management of early-stage cervical cancer, although LRH is characterized by less blood loss and shorter bowel recovery time. Possible higher stump recurrence in the LRH should be further evaluated.

Urologic Complications Following Obstetric and Gynecologic Surgery

PurposeUrologic injuries occur frequently during surgery in the pelvic cavity. Inadequate diagnosis and treatment may lead to severe complications and side effects. This investigation examined the clinical features of urologic complications following obstetric and gynecologic surgery.Materials and MethodsWe accumulated 47,318 obstetric and gynecologic surgery cases from 2007 to 2011. Ninety-seven patients with urological complications were enrolled. This study assessed the causative disease and surgical approach, type, and treatment method of the urologic injury.ResultsOf these 97 patients, 69 had bladder injury, 23 had ureteral injury, 2 had vesicovaginal fistula, 2 had ureterovaginal fistula, and 1 had renal injury. With respect to injury rate by specific surgery, laparoscopic-assisted radical vaginal hysterectomy was the highest with 3 of 98 cases, followed by radical abdominal hysterectomy with 15 of 539 cases. All 69 cases of bladder injury underwent primary suturing during surgery without complications. Of 14 cases with an early diagnosis of ureteral injury, 7 had a ureteral catheter inserted, 5 underwent ureteroureterostomy, and 2 underwent ureteroneocystostomy. Of nine cases with a delayed diagnosis of ureteral injury, ureteral catheter insertion was carried out in three cases, four cases underwent ureteroureterostomy, and two cases underwent ureteroneocystostomy.ConclusionsBladder injury was the most common urological injury during obstetric and gynecologic surgery, followed by ureteral injury. The variety of injured states, difficulty of diagnosis, and time to complete cure were much greater among patients with ureteral injuries. Early diagnosis and urologic intervention is important for better outcomes.

Editors’ Choice

Editors’ Choice

From laparoscopic assisted radical vaginal hysterectomy to vaginal assisted laparoscopic radical hysterectomy

Radical hysterectomy with pelvic lymphadenectomy is the standard surgical treatment for patients with early stage cervical cancer. The majority of radical hysterectomies are performed with the open technique. However, laparoscopic, combined laparoscopic and vaginal, and robotic-assisted approaches may also be used. Compared with the abdominal radical hysterectomy (ARH), laparoscopic techniques are associated with less blood loss, shorter hospital stay, better cosmesis, and faster recovery. A further breakthrough in laparoscopic technique can only be made if safety and oncological clearance are comparable with ARH. We describe the technique and results of laparoscopic assisted radical vaginal hysterectomy and the transition to vaginal assisted laparoscopic radical hysterectomy.

A Comparison of Laparoscopic-Assisted Radical Vaginal Hysterectomy and Laparoscopic Radical Hysterectomy in the Treatment of Cervical Cancer

The aim of this study was to compare the surgical and oncologic outcomes of laparoscopic assisted radical vaginal hysterectomy (LARVH) with that of laparoscopic radical hysterectomy (LRH) for early-stage cervical cancer.

Clinical study of laparoscopic pelvic lymphadenectomy assisted radical vaginal hysterectomy (LARVH) in the treatment of cervical cancer

Objective To discuss clinical effect and feasibility of laparoscopic pelvic lymphadendenectomy assisted radical vaginal hysterectomy (LARVH) in the treatment of cervical cancer. Methods Laparoscopic pelvic lymphadendenectomy assisted radical vaginal hysteretomy was performed in 38 patients with cervical cancer. The operative quality and postoperative recovery effects were analyzed. Results All 38 patients were successfully performed with LARVH and no complications. The radical vaginal hysteretomy were performed in all of patients, 21.4±2.2 pelvic lymph nodes were removed. The average duration of surgery was (240±25.6) min and the average hemorrhage was (340±40.2) ml. There were 7 patients who needed blood transfusion during operation. After operation, the mean time for passage of gas by anus was (2±0.26) days, and the mean recovery time of bladder function was (10.5±1.3) days. Patients were discharged after (9.2±1.1) days on average. 38 patients had no complication. Conclusions For the treatment of uterine neoplasm, LARVH decreased operative damage with more short recovery time, same operative extent as laparotomy. It is an ideal way to treat uterine neoplasm currently. Key words: Laparoscopy; Hysterectomy,vaginal/MT; Uterine cervical neoplasms/SU

Robot-assisted radical hysterectomy—perioperative and survival outcomes in patients with cervical cancer compared to laparoscopic and open radical surgery

In this study, perioperative outcomes and survival data in patients with early cervical cancer operated with three surgical methods: robot-assisted, laparoscopic and open, are to be analyzed. From January 2006 to May 2010, 294 patients with T1в1 cervical cancer were studied retrospectively. Robot-assisted radical hysterectomy (RARH) was performed in 73 (24.8%) of them, laparoscopic-assisted radical vaginal hysterectomy (LARVH) in 46 (15.6%) and, in 175, (59.5%), abdominal radical hysterectomy (ARH). Mean hospital stay of patients with RARH and LARVH was 4.1 ± 0.7 and 4.8 ± 0.5, respectively, and of those with ARH, 9.6 ± 1.0 days (p = 0.001). Mean operative time was 152.2 ± 26.5 min for the robotic group as it was significantly shorter in comparison with the laparoscopic group (232.1 ± 61.7 min) and laparotomy group (168.2 ± 31.1 min) (p = 0.001). The application of Cox regression analysis found that the regional lymph node metastases were of significant value for disease-free survival (DSF), and the nodal status and recurrence presence—for overall survival (OS). Type of surgical procedure did not influence DSF, as well as OS. RARH has been established to be a safe procedure with proven advantages in regard to operative time and hospital stay. The absence of significant differences in DSF and OS is a substantial reason to continue, from an oncologic point of view, the application of this method on patients with T1в1 cervical cancer.

Laparoscopic assisted radical vaginal hysterectomy versus radical abdominal hysterectomy-a randomised phase II trial: perioperative outcomes and surgicopathological measurements

Laparoscopic assisted radical vaginal hysterectomy versus radical abdominal hysterectomy-a randomised phase II trial: perioperative outcomes and surgicopathological measurements

Laparoscopic assisted radical vaginal hysterectomy versus radical abdominal hysterectomy-a randomised phase II trial: perioperative outcomes and surgicopathological measurements

Laparoscopic assisted radical vaginal hysterectomy versus radical abdominal hysterectomy-a randomised phase II trial: perioperative outcomes and surgicopathological measurements