English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

The objective of this study was to compare outcomes of laparoscopically assisted radical vaginal hysterectomy (LARVH) vs. abdominal radical hysterectomy (RH) for early-stage cervical cancer. This is a retrospective study of all LARVH and RH procedures between January 2003 and June 2006 in our tertiary referral centre. Demographic, intraoperative and postoperative parameters in both groups were compared. Fourteen women (stage IA2–IB) underwent LARVH, and 12 women (stage IA2 to IB) had RH. All had clear excision margins. None of the laparoscopic procedures were converted into laparotomy. There have not been any recurrences in either group during the follow-up period. We conclude that LARVH and RH are equally efficacious surgical methods. The LARVH group had shorter hospital stay, reduced blood loss, shorter bladder recovery time, less postoperative complications but higher intraoperative injury rate in comparison to RH. This may reflect the learning curve of this new procedure.

gynecological surgery$bprint/gynecological surgery

Early experience of laparoscopically assisted radical vaginal hysterectomy (Coelio-Schauta) versus abdominal radical hysterectomy for early stage cervical cancer