Clinical trial registration number ISRCTN80747160 (http://www.ISRCTN.org); NTR964 (http://www.trialregister.nl).
1471-0528/asset/BJO_left.gif?v=1&s=0fb87361cdb6be25fdf05019eed6d47f5143f610)
1471-0528/asset/olbannerright.gif?v=1&s=3892ef16ff18d6834c302faf85268a49f5fc588f)
Gynaecological surgery
You have full text access to this OnlineOpen article
Perioperative outcomes using LigaSure compared with conventional bipolar instruments in laparoscopic hysterectomy: a randomised controlled trial
Article first published online: 6 SEP 2011
DOI: 10.1111/j.1471-0528.2011.03089.x
© 2011 The Authors BJOG An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology © 2011 RCOG
Issue
BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology
Volume 118, Issue 13, pages 1568–1575, December 2011
Additional Information
How to Cite
Janssen, P., Brölmann, H., van Kesteren, P., Bongers, M., Thurkow, A., Heymans, M. and Huirne, J. (2011), Perioperative outcomes using LigaSure compared with conventional bipolar instruments in laparoscopic hysterectomy: a randomised controlled trial. BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology, 118: 1568–1575. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-0528.2011.03089.x
Publication History
- Issue published online: 11 NOV 2011
- Article first published online: 6 SEP 2011
- Accepted 24 June 2011. Published Online 6 September 2011.
- Abstract
- Article
- References
- Cited By
Keywords:
- Conventional bipolar instrument;
- haemostasis;
- laparoscopic hysterectomy;
- LigaSure;
- randomised controlled trial
Please cite this paper as: Janssen P, Brölmann H, van Kesteren P, Bongers M, Thurkow A, Heymans M, Huirne J. Perioperative outcomes using LigaSure compared with conventional bipolar instruments in laparoscopic hysterectomy: a randomised controlled trial. BJOG 2011;118:1568–1575.
Objective To compare the effects of LigaSure versus the conventional bipolar technique on operating time and blood loss during laparoscopic hysterectomy.
Design A randomised controlled trial.
Setting Three teaching hospitals.
Population Women undergoing a laparoscopic hysterectomy for benign indications.
Methods 140 women undergoing a laparoscopic hysterectomy were randomised for LigaSure or conventional bipolar instruments.
Main outcome measures Primary outcome was operating time from initial skin incision till detachment of the uterus. Secondary outcome measures were total operating time (from initial skin incision till final skin closure), time to dissect the adnexal ligaments, intra-operative blood loss and subjective evaluation by the surgeon of the instrument used.
Results No differences in operating time (from initial skin incision till uterine detachment and initial skin incision till final skin closure) using LigaSure versus conventional bipolar instruments: 97.6 versus 91.8 minutes (P = 0.39, 95% CI – 7.6 to 19.2), and 148.1 versus 142.1 minutes (P = 0.46, 95% CI – 10.1 to 22.3), respectively. The mean blood loss using LigaSure versus conventional bipolar was 234.1 versus 273.1 ml (P = 0.46, 95% CI -39.1 to 52.7). Various subjective efficacy and instrument handling parameters were significantly different between the two instruments and between the different participating centres.
Conclusions There were no significant differences in operating time and blood loss between the use of LigaSure and the use of conventional bipolar instruments during laparoscopic hysterectomy, even after correction for potential confounders. User satisfaction parameters were assessed as significantly different by surgeons of the participating centres.