LAPAROSCOPIC SUPRACERVICAL HYSTERECTOMY VERSUS LAPAROSCOPIC-ASSISTED VAGINAL HYSTERECTOMY

This retrospective study compared 41 patients, 21 undergoing laparosco pic-assisted hysterectomy (LAVH) and 20 undergoing laparoscopic suprac ervical hysterectomy(LSH). The groups were comparable in age, weight, and previous abdominal surgeries. Surgical indications were similar wi th the exception of uterine carcinoma, which was always treated by LAV H. Vaginal repairs were more common in the LAVH group. The mean operat ive times, estimated blood losses, uterine weights, and hospital stays were all comparable for both groups. A potential advantage of LSH is that it requires less operative dissection of the bladder, ureter, bow el, and uterine artery. The possible disadvantage of LSH is the 10% fr equency of cyclic stump bleeding. Larger studies with prolonged follow -up will be necessary to evaluate risks and benefits of the procedures .