Isobaric gasless laparoscopy versus minilaparotomy in uterine myomectomy: a randomized trial.
BACKGROUND
Isobaric gasless laparoscopy and minilaparotomy have been used as more recent minimally invasive approaches to myomectomy. This randomized trial aimed to compare the surgical and immediate postoperative outcomes for myomectomy performed by isobaric gasless laparoscopy with those for minilaparotomy.


METHODS
A total of 100 patients with symptomatic uterine myomas requiring myomectomy were randomly allocated to the gasless laparoscopy group or the minilaparotomy group. The randomization procedure was based on a computer-generated list. The primary outcome was a comparison of the discharge times between the two procedures. A power calculation verified that more than 26 patients for each group was necessary to detect a difference of more than 24 h in discharge time with an alpha error level of 5% and a beta error of 80%. Continuous outcome variables were analyzed using the Student's t-test. Discrete variables were analyzed with the chi-square test or Fisher's exact test. A p value less than 0.05 was considered statistically significant.


RESULTS
The mean discharge time was longer for minilaparotomy than for gasless laparoscopy (98.4 +/- 1.4 vs 52.8 +/- 1.6 h; p < 0.001). Gasless laparoscopy resulted in shorter times for canalization (21.6 +/- 1.1 vs 32 +/- 1.3 h; p < 0.05) and surgery (79.5 +/- 25.1 vs 103.5 +/- 24.9 min; p < 0.001). The intraoperative blood loss was less with gasless laparoscopy (154.2 +/- 1.2 vs 188.6 +/- 1.3 ml; p < 0.001). No intraoperative complications occurred, and no case was returned to the theater in either group. No conversion to standard laparotomy was necessary.


CONCLUSIONS
Isobaric gasless laparoscopy and minilaparotomy can be suitable options for uterine myomectomy. Several surgical and immediate postoperative outcomes were significantly better in the gasless laparoscopy group than in the minilaparotomy group. However, further controlled prospective studies are required to confirm the results.
Sesti
F
F
Section of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Department of Surgery, School of Medicine, Tor Vergata Hospital University of Rome, Viale Oxford 81, 00133, Rome, Italy. Francesco.Sesti@uniroma2.it
Capobianco
F
F
Capozzolo
T
T
Pietropolli
A
A
Piccione
E
E
D000328:Adult; D000704:Analysis of Variance; D016009:Chi-Square Distribution; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D010535:Laparoscopy / Q000379:methods*; D007813:Laparotomy / Q000379:methods*; D007889:Leiomyoma / Q000601:surgery*; D016896:Treatment Outcome; D014594:Uterine Neoplasms / Q000601:surgery*
J Reprod Med. 2003 Oct;48(10):792-8
14619647
Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2006 Nov;129(1):9-14
16723181
JSLS. 2005 Oct-Dec;9(4):434-8
16381362
Surg Technol Int. 2004;13:157-67
15744686
Obstet Gynecol. 2004 Aug;104(2):393-406
15292018
Contracept Fertil Sex. 1996 Oct;24(10):751-6
8974613
Fertil Steril. 1999 Mar;71(3):571-4
10065802
Hum Reprod. 2001 Apr;16(4):770-4
11278231
J Am Assoc Gynecol Laparosc. 2003 Nov;10(4):461-8
14738629
Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2005 Apr 1;119(2):232-6
15808386
Hum Reprod. 1996 Jul;11(7):1427-32
8671480
J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2005 May-Jun;12(3):275-83
15922987
J Am Assoc Gynecol Laparosc. 2001 May;8(2):231-40
11342730
Surg Endosc. 2006 Sep;20(9):1406-9
16823659
Hum Reprod. 2000 Dec;15(12):2663-8
11098042
Obstet Gynecol. 1996 Mar;87(3):456-9
8598975
Hum Reprod Update. 2000 Nov-Dec;6(6):588-94
11129692
J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2005 Nov-Dec;12(6):470-4
16337572
Obstet Gynecol Clin North Am. 1995 Dec;22(4):757-80
8786880
Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2005 Apr 1;119(2):228-31
15808385
Surg Endosc. 2006 Sep;20(9):1427-30
16703432
J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2006 Mar-Apr;13(2):92-7
16527709
JSLS. 2005 Oct-Dec;9(4):447-53
16381365
Hum Reprod. 2003 Dec;18(12):2590-4
14645175
Hum Reprod. 1997 Sep;12(9):1927-30
9363708
Hum Reprod. 2001 Aug;16(8):1726-31
11473973