Garry Ray, Fountain Jayne, Mason Su, Hawe Jeremy, Napp Vicky, Abbott Jason, Clayton Richard, Phillips Graham, Whittaker Mark, Lilford Richard, Bridgman Stephen, Brown Julia
University of Western Australia, Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, King Edward Memorial Hospital, Subiaco, Perth, WA 6008, Australia.
BMJ. 2004 Jan 17;328(7432):129. doi: 10.1136/bmj.37984.623889.F6. Epub 2004 Jan 7.
To compare the effects of laparoscopic hysterectomy and abdominal hysterectomy in the abdominal trial, and laparoscopic hysterectomy and vaginal hysterectomy in the vaginal trial.
Two parallel, multicentre, randomised trials.
28 UK centres and two South African centres.
1380 women were recruited; 1346 had surgery; 937 were followed up at one year. Primary outcome Rate of major complications.
In the abdominal trial laparoscopic hysterectomy was associated with a higher rate of major complications than abdominal hysterectomy (11.1% v 6.2%, P = 0.02; difference 4.9%, 95% confidence interval 0.9% to 9.1%) and the number needed to treat to harm was 20. Laparoscopic hysterectomy also took longer to perform (84 minutes v 50 minutes) but was less painful (visual analogue scale 3.51 v 3.88, P = 0.01) and resulted in a shorter stay in hospital after the operation (3 days v 4 days). Six weeks after the operation, laparoscopic hysterectomy was associated with less pain and better quality of life than abdominal hysterectomy (SF-12, body image scale, and sexual activity questionnaires). In the vaginal trial we found no evidence of a difference in major complication rates between laparoscopic hysterectomy and vaginal hysterectomy (9.8% v 9.5%, P = 0.92; difference 0.3%, -5.2% to 5.8%), and the number needed to treat to harm was 333. We found no evidence of other differences between laparoscopic hysterectomy and vaginal hysterectomy except that laparoscopic hysterectomy took longer to perform (72 minutes v 39 minutes) and was associated with a higher rate of detecting unexpected pathology (16.4% v 4.8%, P = < 0.01). However, this trial was underpowered.
Laparoscopic hysterectomy was associated with a significantly higher rate of major complications than abdominal hysterectomy. It also took longer to perform but was associated with less pain, quicker recovery, and better short term quality of life. The trial comparing vaginal hysterectomy with laparoscopic hysterectomy was underpowered and is inconclusive on the rate of major complications; however, vaginal hysterectomy took less time.
在腹部手术试验中比较腹腔镜子宫切除术与经腹子宫切除术的效果,以及在阴道手术试验中比较腹腔镜子宫切除术与经阴道子宫切除术的效果。
两项平行、多中心、随机试验。
28个英国中心和2个南非中心。
招募了1380名女性;1346名接受了手术;937名在术后一年接受随访。主要结局 严重并发症发生率。
在腹部手术试验中,腹腔镜子宫切除术的严重并发症发生率高于经腹子宫切除术(11.1%对6.2%,P = 0.02;差异4.9%,95%置信区间0.9%至9.1%),造成伤害的需治疗人数为20。腹腔镜子宫切除术的手术时间也更长(84分钟对50分钟),但疼痛较轻(视觉模拟评分3.51对3.88,P = 0.01),术后住院时间较短(3天对4天)。术后六周,与经腹子宫切除术相比,腹腔镜子宫切除术的疼痛较轻,生活质量较好(SF-12、身体形象量表和性活动问卷)。在阴道手术试验中,我们没有发现腹腔镜子宫切除术与经阴道子宫切除术在严重并发症发生率上存在差异的证据(9.8%对9.5%,P = 0.92;差异0.3%,-5.2%至5.8%),造成伤害的需治疗人数为333。除了腹腔镜子宫切除术手术时间更长(72分钟对39分钟)以及发现意外病理的发生率更高(16.4%对4.8%,P = < 0.01)外,我们没有发现腹腔镜子宫切除术与经阴道子宫切除术之间存在其他差异的证据。然而,该试验的效能不足。
腹腔镜子宫切除术的严重并发症发生率显著高于经腹子宫切除术。其手术时间也更长,但疼痛较轻,恢复更快,短期生活质量更好。比较经阴道子宫切除术与腹腔镜子宫切除术的试验效能不足,在严重并发症发生率方面尚无定论;然而,经阴道子宫切除术所需时间较短。