Pelviscopic compared to laparotomic and vaginal intrafascial hysterectomy.
OA: gold
CC-BY-4.0
AI-generated summary
This study compared six hysterectomy techniques (pelviscopic, laparotomy, abdominal, intrafascial vaginal, vaginal, and laparoscopic assisted vaginal) for benign disorders, analyzing patient characteristics, blood loss, operating time, hospital stay, and postoperative pain.
One-sentence paraphrase of the abstract; not a substitute for reading it. No clinical advice. How this works
Abstract
Between 1993 and 1994, 368 women underwent hysterectomies for benign disorders at the University of Kiel. Of these, 58.7% were performed either by pelviscopic or by laparotomy Classic Intrafascial Supracervical Hysterectomy (CISH). Of the remaining, 14.8% were performed by abdominal hysterectomy, 13.6% by Intrafascial Vaginal Hysterectomy (IVH), 12.2% by Vaginal Hysterectomy (VH), and only 0.05% by Laparoscopic Assisted Vaginal Hysterectomy (LAVH). Comparative data of these six surgical techniques concerning patients characteristics, indications for operation, histological features, blood loss, operating time, hospital stay, uterine weights and postoperatively used analgesics are described.
My notes (saved in your browser only)
Citation neighborhood (no data yet)
We don't have any in-corpus citations linked to this paper yet. The paper's references may be in our DB but unresolved to ``paper_id`` (resolution happens at ingest when the cited DOI matches a row we already have). Run the cross-source citation reconcile pass to retry.
Source provenance
- europepmc
- last seen: 2026-09-06T09:34:12.023084+00:00
- unpaywall
- last seen: 2026-05-21T05:10:58.409756+00:00
License: CC-BY-4.0