ArticleGynecology and minimally invasive therapy
Does Uterine Manipulator Type Affect Surgical Outcomes of Laparoscopic Hysterectomy?
Article in Gynecology and minimally invasive therapy. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Clinical Relevance of Uterine Manipulation on Oncologic Outcome in Robot-Assisted versus Open Surgery in the Management of Endometrial Cancer.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- Urologic Complication after Laparoscopic Hysterectomy in Gynecology Oncology: A Single-Center Analysis and Narrative Review of the Literature.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2022Review
- Comparison of Uterine manipulators types in total Laparoscopic Hysterectomy: A retrospective study.Pakistan journal of medical sciencesArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesMany surgeons use uterine manipulator (UM) during laparoscopic hysterectomy (LH). In this study, we aimed to compare the outcomes of LH operations performed by using partially reusable UM with the articulated system (artUM) and disposable (dUM) UM without articulation. MATERIALS AND
methodsA total of 99 patients underwent the LH operation. This study was carried out with 35 of those 99 Caucasian patients who met the inclusion criteria. Group 1 consisted for 7 LH operations using the articulated RUMI
resultsMean operation time was found to be 157.1 ± 42.0 min. The operation time was found statistically longer in Group 1, consisted of artUM used patients (
conclusionThe UM type did not alter the surgical outcomes except the operating time in our study. According to our results, the surgical technique is a more significant variable than instruments used in LH for normal size uterus. Further prospective, large-scale studies comparing various UM systems are mandatory.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.