AUCTORES
Globalize your Research
Research Article | DOI: https://doi.org/10.31579/2642-9756/018
*Corresponding Author: Dr Bassem A Islam Lecturer in Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Faculty of Medicine, Ain Shams University, Cairo. Egypt
Citation: Metwally Ahmed NM. (2020) Laparoscopic Hysterectomy versus Abdominal Hysterectomy of Enlarged Uterus. J Women Health Care Issues, 3(1); Doi:10.31579/2642-9756/018
Copyright: ©2020. Bassem A Islam, This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Received: 16 December 2019 | Accepted: 02 January 2020 | Published: 07 January 2020
Keywords: laparoscopic hysterectomy
This prospective interventional to assess feasibility of total laparoscopic hysterectomy (LH) for uteri weighing 280 gm or more. The study included 120 patients divided to 60 patient conducted total laparoscopic hysterectomies and 60 patients conduct total abdominal hysterectomy as standard method.
Full history taking, gynecologic examination and ultrasound examination were done to all patients. The following data were collected from every patient in all groups: Age, BMI, uterine weight, Operative time, Estimated intraoperative blood loss, Preoperative hemoglobin and postoperative hemoglobin deficit 12 hours after surgery, intraoperative and Post-operative complications, Time to resumption of bowel movements to normal, Length of hospital stay.
The most common indication among our patients was fibroid uterus while adenomyosis came second. All operations were performed by the same surgeons and using the same technique.
We observe BMI is not considering as obstacle in laparoscopic group with advancement of anesthesia and sealing system.
The mean operating time was slightly but not significally lower in laparoscopic hysterectomy with highly significant difference in the estimated blood loss in favor of laparoscopic group.
The total incidence of intra-operative and postoperative complication of patient submitted to laparoscopic hysterectomy lower than conventional hysterectomy group but not statically significantly. There was significant difference in pain scoring, earlier bowel movement and hospital stay in the arm of laparoscopic group.
Conclusion: The total laparoscopic hysterectomy of enlarged uterus is a safe and reasonable alternative procedure to traditional abdominal hysterectomy in terms of operative and postoperative short-term outcomes.
Hysterectomy is the most common major gynecological operation performed in the world, that is often performed for symptomatic benign diseases, including menorrhagia, fibroids, pelvic pain, and uterine prolapse are responsible for more than 70% of indications for hysterectomy [1].
There is no universal agreement on the best technique for hysterectomy [2] and the route of choice (conventional open surgery, laparoscopy or vaginal surgery) depends on clinical and technical factors, such as uterine weight and previous vaginal deliveries, as well as on the preference of the surgeon [3].
The removal of an extremely large uterus represents a challenge to the surgeon regardless of the surgical approach and technique used. Giant myomas obstruct the pelvis and make the uterus extremely difficult to mobilize and manipulate, thus reducing the possibility to visualize the surrounding anatomic structures and partially or totally impairing the surgeon's ability to correctly develop the spaces. There are no clear guidelines about large uteri, and the literature is vague regarding the best surgical option in these cases [4].
Large uteri also increase complications and morbidities, such as prolonged operation time, excessive blood loss from retrograde bleeding [5] and high rates of blood transfusion and laparoconversion. With time, surgical techniques have progressed, and laparoscopic instruments have improved, both of which have led to hysterectomies for large uteri being performed by laparoscopy safely and effectively [6].
Specimen can be removed more efficiently by many techniques for volume reduction, including transvaginal volume reduction, laparoscopic morcellation, a combination of vaginal and laparoscopic procedures and mini-laparotomy [7].
The aim of this study was to assess feasibility of laparoscopic hysterectomy (LH) for uteri weighing 280 gm or more and compare this technique with conventional hysterectomy.
Patients and methods:
This study was prospective interventional clinical study.
From January 2016 and August 2019. The study took place in Ain Shams University hospital and patients were recruited from Ain Shams Gynecology clinic. Sample size was calculated by open EPI to be 120 cases with confidence level 95% and power of test80%.
Inclusion criteria for cases:
Exclusion criteria:
This study included 120 patients scheduled to undergo total hysterectomy and bilateral salpingectomy with or without bilateral ooophorectomy. they were divided into 2 groups.
Conventional hysterectomy group (A): (60 patients) will undergo abdominal hysterectomy using conventional sutures.
Laparoscopic hysterectomy group (B): (60 patients) will undergo laparoscopic hysterectomy using LigaSure.
Method of intervention was adopted according to patient’s desire. Appropriate informative consent was obtained from the patient after a thorough explanation and description of the planned procedure, its potential risks and benefits, and the possibility of conversion to laparotomy in the laparoscopic group. Patients are informed that general anesthesia will be used with proper explanation of the procedure and its potential risks by the anesthesiologist.
Full history taking, gynecologic examination and ultrasound examination were done to all patients.
The following data were collected from every patient in all groups:
Combined transabdominal and transvaginal ultrasound was performed with a 3.5 mHz and 7.5 mHz respectively to determine all 3 uterine dimensions.
The uterine length (L) was the distance between the external cervical os to the dome of the fundus; the maximum width (W) and anteroposterior (AP) diameter were taken perpendicular to the axis of the uterine length. The ultrasound estimated uterine weight (UWT) was derived from the algebraic formula by Kung and Chang 1996 expressed in weights and measurements: weight (g) = 50 + (4/3 x π x L/2 x W/2 x AP/2), this formula was further simplified to: weight (g) = L x W xAP x0.52 (8).
During laparoscopy the amount of blood loss was estimated by the amount in the suction container after subtracting the amount of fluid used for washing intraoperative blood loss measured.
All patients are advised to be fasting for 12 hours before surgery. Two fleet enemata are done; one the night before and one 2 hours before operation.
Routine preoperative tests were done for every patient including: CBC, coagulation profile, FBS, hepatitis markers screening, liver and kidney function tests and ECG. Patients with other medical problems need further evaluation by general medicine doctor who may order other laboratory tests as required.
General anesthesia is used and prophylactic antibiotics are given in the form of 2 grams cefotaxime which is repeated as one gram 12 hours after surgery.
All the operations were performed by at least one of the consultants included as supervisors in this study.
After the operation, all patients are given analgesia in the form of meperidine (pethidine) 50 mg injection once plus diclophenac sodium (Voltaren 75 mg ampoule) intramuscularly twice 12 hours apart. Further analgesia is required in some cases. Oral fluids begin as soon as possible after recording bowel movements followed by semisolid fluids. Patients are allowed to go home when ambulatory, passing urine and gas normally without complications. Patients are provided after discharge with a telephone number that is available 24 hours a day. Follow-up visits are scheduled after one week, then after one month.
Thromboprophylaxis in the form of 40-60 mg Enoxaparin (Clexane) is given 6-12 hours postoperatively as SC injections, then every 24 hours for 3-5 days.
In the laparoscopy group, the operating table is designed to allow a deep Trendelenburg position. The patients are placed in padded Allen stirrups to provide good support and positioning. After thighs are slightly abducted, semi flexed, a uterine manipulator is fixed. In this study, Clermont-Ferrand manipulator is used.
Groups A (abdominal hysterectomy with conventional sutures):
After general anesthesia, a Foley catheter is fixed within the bladder and the patient is put in Trendelenburg position. A transverse incision is made into the pubic hairline including skin and subcutaneous fat until reaching the anterior rectus fascia.
The fat is cleared from the midline superiorly and inferiorly to expose approximately 5-6 cm of fascia in the vertical axis. The anterior rectus fascia is cut in a Transverse. The rectus muscles are separated, exposing the fascia transversalis and the peritoneum. The peritoneum is entered digitally or by scissors.
The uterus and the adnexa are brought outside the abdominal wall using the index and middle fingers as well as the thumb of the left hand and sometimes either a strong traction suture in the uterine fundus or via two long Kocher clamps lateral to the corpus. Two long, narrow abdominal retractors are used. Packing of the intestine is done.
The round and infundibulopelvic ligaments are secured and cut using either clamps or sutures. The uterine vessels are clamped, divided, ligated. The bladder is mobilized while the cardinal and uterosacral ligaments are divided. The specimen is cut away from vaginal cuff which is closed via open cuff or closed cuff techniques. The abdominal wall is closed as usual with the pelvic and parietal peritoneum unclosed and the rectus muscles are approximated in the midline via 2 to 3 interrupted sutures. The rectus sheath was then closed with vicryl No.1 running sutures. Subcutaneous fat was closed only if it is > 2 cm thickness using Vicryl No.2/0 sutures. The skin was closed by applying subcuticular non-absorbable polypropylene sutures.
Group B (laparoscopic group):
Routine laparoscopic equipment that is essential for performing a successful laparoscopic hysterectomy includes:
Trocar placement:
We routinely place a Veress needle in the lower edge of the umbilicus. Sometime we enter peritoneal cavity through palmer point in case of previous lower abdominal surgery after insertion of rayel and exclude splenomegaly also to avoid injury of enlarged uterus we enter peritoneal cavity in point between umbilicus and xyphoid process lee huang pointpoint . We then insufflate to 20 mmHg prior to placement of any trocars. A 10-12 mm trocar is then placed through a vertical lower intraumbilical incision for insertion of the zero-degree telescope (Karl Storz, Tuttlingen, Germany). Two additional 5 mm trocars are then placed into the peritoneal cavity. This pair were placed lateral to the inferior epigastric vessels approximately two fingerbreadths above the pubis. the third one was 12 mm and put in the suprapubic region. In some cases, we used only two (10 mm) lateral ports without suprapubic one.
Identification of the ureters:
The ureters should be identified prior to securing any supporting structures to the uterus. In most cases the ureters are visible through the peritoneum. It lies on the medial peritoneal leaf of the broad ligament.
Securing the round ligaments:
The round ligaments can easily be desiccated by using ligaSure instrument. The uterus is deviated to the left by the manipulator and the assistant uses a grasper to place the round ligament under tension. The round ligament is coagulated and cut in the middle of the ligament with the coagulating instrument introduced from the ipsilateral side.
Securing infundibulopelvic and uterine-ovarian ligaments:
For women who want to preserve their ovaries, the uterine-ovarian ligaments and Fallopian tubes were sealed and cut medial to the ovary using ligaSure atlas instrument 10 mm. but if we want to remove the ovaries we cut the infundibulopelvic ligament itself taking care of the course of the ureter.
Creation of the bladder flap:
An assistant retroverts the uterus and pushes it cephalad using the manipulator. The upper junction of the vesico-uterine peritoneal fold is distinguished as a white line. Identification of the white line is important because, cephalad to the white line, the peritoneum is attached tightly to the uterus. Below this demarcation the peritoneum is loosely attached to the cervix and can be easily dissected away. The dome of the bladder is approximately 2 cm to 2.5 cm below the white line.
Using a grasper, the vesicouterine fold is placed under traction. A transverse incision is made just below the white line and the bladder is dissected away from the lower uterine segment and cervix using a peace of sponge on a grasper. In the right tissue plane, the dissection should be relatively bloodless. The middle band of loose connective tissue is the vesico-cervical ligament. This ligament does not contain blood vessels and can be easily divided. Laparoscopic scissors with electroenergy can be used to coagulate any small incidental bleeders during dissection. The lateral bands of connection on both sides of the cervix are bladder pillars. The bladder pillars contain blood vessels and are desiccated prior to dissection.
Dissection of the bladder laterally helps pull the ureters away from the cervix. To achieve this, the bladder peritoneum is incised to the level of the round ligament. Dissection is continued in the avascular plane and the bladder is pushed caudally over the cervix to its junction with the anterior fornix of the vagina.
Securing the uterine arteries:
The broad ligaments on both sides are opened downward and towards the cervix, skeletonizing the uterine vessels. Once the uterine vessels are skeletonized they can be sealed laterally using LigaSure atlas instrument 10 mm. With meticulous dissection, the uterine vessels can be identified at the level of the ureteric canal as it crosses above the ureter. Knowledge of the course of the ureter is essential at this point to avoid injury. the uterine vessels can be secured medially as they enter the uterine body.
After dealing with the uterine artery, the manipulator is used to push the uterus to the left side during grasping and cutting the Mackenrodet’s ligament on the right and vice versa. This is done using LigaSure instrument.
After that, we use the Valley laparoscopic hook or unipolar hook to open the vagina, we open the vagina anteriorly against the hard part of the manipulator and we move it laterally and posteriorly carefully to open the cuff laterally, then posteriorly. For fear of loss of pneumoperitoneum, we use a big sponge in a glove to pack the vagina tightly and surround the manipulator. Then, we remove the uterus vaginally as one part or after morcellation. The surgeon put it in the opening and by a Vulsellum forceps we catch it vaginally and remove it.
After removing the uterus, we do underwater examination and for this purpose, we insufflate the peritoneum again, then irrigate the peritoneal cavity with 1000-1500 cc saline, and inspect carefully all the pedicles and the vaginal vault, any bleeding point was controlled using bipolar forces or LigaSure instrument. The vault is either left opened or closed laparoscopically.
We remove all the trocars under vision. CO2 was allowed to escape gradually, and then the last trocar is removed under vision. Lastly, we close the skin using non-absorbable silk suture which is removed after 7 days.
Statistical analysis
Statistical analysis was performed using the Statistical Package for Social Science for Windows (SPSS, Inc., Chicago, IL) version 20 (10).
Level significance:
For all above mentioned statistical tests done, the threshold of significance is fixed at 5% level (p-value). A P value < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Independent t test was used for statistical analysis, Variables with normal distribution were expressed as mean and 95% CI ± standard deviation.
During the study period started from January 2016 to December 2019, a total of 120 patients underwent hysterectomy for uteri more than 280 gm. As a consequence, 60 patients were included in conventional hysterectomy group and 60 patients in laparoscopic hysterectomy group.
The p value in body mass index as shown in table 1 was significant with laparoscopic hysterectomy group (34.3±1.3 kg/m2) in comparison to conventional hysterectomy group (29.8±1.4 kg/m2). In other side no difference was found between the two groups in term of age, parity and previous abdominal surgery.
All patients were operated in this study only benign condition. Including fibroid uterus, endometrial hyperplasia, dysfunctional uterine bleeding not responding to medical treatment and suspected adenomyosis as listed in table [2]. Fibroid uterus represented 70 % in conventional hysterectomy group, 66.6% in laparoscopic hysterectomy group. Suspected adenomyosis represented 10% in conventional hysterectomy group 16.6% in laparoscopic hysterectomy group. Dysfunctional Uterine Bleeding (DUB) represented 13.3% in conventional hysterectomy group, 6.6% in laparoscopic hysterectomy group. Also, endometrial hyperplasia represented 6.6% in conventional hysterectomy group, 10% in laparoscopic hysterectomy group.
There are no difference was found between the two groups in ultrasound variables in both group as described in Table3.
As shown in table (4) there was highly significant difference in the estimated blood loss among the two groups with group of laparoscopic hysterectomy having the least blood loss (110.1 ± 30.8 ml) in comparison to groups of conventional hysterectomy(170.3 ± 54.4). Also, there was significant difference in hemoglobin drop between groups of laparoscopic hysterectomy (0.7 ± 0.2 gm/dl) to groups of conventional hysterectomy (1.4 ±0.9 gm/dl).
There is no signifance difference in intraoperative blood transfusion and mean operative time between both groups. As regard intraoperative and postoperative complication of patient submitted to laparoscopic hysterectomy for enlarged uterus .There were one patient of ureteral injury (discovered day 5 postoperative with leakage of urine per vagina, ureteric stent inserted by cystoscopy and removed after 2 months with complete healing), abdominal wall hematoma (developed at site of right lateral port with close follow up and resolve spontaneously) and postoperative febrile morbidity .however in conventional hysterectomy group one patient had bladder injury (During pushing the bladder flap downwards, the injury occurred and repair was done) ileus and vaginal stump infection ,three patient of wound seroma and infection and five patient with postoperative febrile morbidity. The total incidence of intra-operative and postoperative complication of patient submitted to laparoscopic hysterectomy lower than conventional hysterectomy group but not statically significantly as show in table [4].
As shown in table (5), there was a significant difference in the pain score; using the revised faces pain scale; among the two groups with the highest pain score being observed in conventional hysterectomy group (5.2 ± 1.1) versus laparoscopic hysterectomy group (3.8 ± 1.6).
There was a significant difference in the hospital stay among the two groups, the longest hospital stay occurred in conventional hysterectomy group (63.8 ± 5.7 hours) versus laparoscopic hysterectomy group (20.7 ± 2.5 hours).also a significant difference was observed in first bowel movement in both groups, the faster occur in laparoscopic hysterectomy group (16.2 ± 2.4 hours) versus conventional hysterectomy group (19.8 ± 6.7 hours).
Group of hysterectomy | conventional hysterectomy | laparoscopic hysterectomy | P value |
Age (years) Mean ± SD | 48.7±3.9 | 48.5±4.1 | 0.86 |
Parity | 3.1+2.1 | 3.5+2.8 | 0.75 |
BMI (kg/m2) Mean ± SD | 29.8±1.4 | 34.3±1.3 | <0.001* |
Previous abdominal surgery including caesarean section | 2 | 1 | 0.97 |
*Statistically highly significant difference (P ≤ 0.001) Kg: kilogram
Table (1): The preoperative demographic data for all of our patients.
Group of hysterectomy | conventional hysterectomy | laparoscopic hysterectomy | Total | |||
No | % | No | % | No | % | |
Fibroid | 42 | 70 | 40 | 66.6 | 82 | 68.3 |
Adenomyosis | 6 | 10 | 10 | 16.6 | 16 | 13.3 |
DUB | 8 | 13.3 | 4 | 6.6 | 12 | 10 |
Endometrial hyperplasia | 4 | 6.6 | 6 | 10 | 10 | 8.3 |
DUB: dysfunctional uterine bleeding No: number.
Table (2): Frequency distribution of different indications of hysterectomy in both groups according to histopathology.
Variable | conventional hysterectomy | laparoscopic hysterectomy | P value |
US length (cm) Mean ± SD | 12.90 ± 1.42 | 13.42 ±2.7 | 0.71 |
US width (cm) Mean ± SD | 9.77 ± 0.9 | 10.24 ±0.7 | 0.54 |
US AP (cm) Mean ± SD | 8.75 ± 0.4 | 9.12 ± 0.6 | 0.45 |
US estimated weight (gm) | 474.5 ±192.7 | 454.5 ±172.7 | 0.23 |
US: Ultrasound, SD: standard deviation, cm centimeter, gm: gram.
Table (3): Ultrasound variables of studied patient.
| conventional hysterectomy | laparoscopic hysterectomy | P value |
Operative time (minutes) Mean±SD | 84.7 ± 9.9 | 77.3 ± 7.8 | 0.15 |
Blood loss ( ml) Mean ±SD | 170.3 ± 54.4 | 110.1 ± 30.8 | < 0.001* |
Hb Drop (gm/dL) mean ± SD | 1.4 ±0.9 gm/dl | 0.7±0.2 gm/dl | < 0.001* |
Intraoperative blood transfusion | 0 | 1 | 0.49 |
| conventional hysterectomy | laparoscopic hysterectomy | P value |
Ureteral injury | 0 (0) | 2(0.03) | 0.49 |
Bladder injury | 2(0.03) | 0 (0) | 0.49 |
Ileus | 2(0.03) | 0 (0) | 0.49 |
Pelvic and abdominal wall Haematoma | 0 (0) | 2(0.03) | 0.49 |
Postoperative febrile morbidity | 10 (0.16) | 2(0.03) | 0.15 |
Vaginal stump infection | 2(0.03) | 0(0) | 0.49 |
Wound seroma and infection | 6(0.13) | 0(0) | 0.24 |
Total number of complication | 22(0.43) | 6(0.1) | 0.02 |
HB: hemoglobin, ml: milliliter, SD: standard deviation, gm :gram, dl: deciliter.
*Statistically highly significant difference (P ≤ 0.001)
Table (4): Ooperative details of hysterectomy (conventional hysterectomy vs. laparoscopic hysterectomy) for enlarged uterus.
| conventional hysterectomy | laparoscopic hysterectomy | P value |
Hospital stay (hours) Mean ± SD | 63.8 ± 5.7 | 20.7 ± 2.5 | < 0.001* |
Bowel movements (hours) Mean ± SD | 19.8± 6.7 | 16.2± 2.4 | < 0.001* |
Pain score Mean ± SD | 5.2 ± 1.1 | 3.8 ± 1.6 | < 0.001* |
SD: standard deviation. *Statistically highly significant difference (P ≤ 0.001)
Table 5: Hospital stay, bowel movement and pain score in studied group.
Hysterectomy is one of the most common gynecologic surgical procedures in the United States. It ranks second after cesarean section, with around 600,000 procedures performed each year for various indications. [11] Despite the advances of laparoscopic techniques, the majority of hysterectomies are still being done by the abdominal route (54.2%) or the vaginal route (19.7%). Use of laparoscopic hysterectomy has increased in the last 20 years, accounted for 13.6% of all hysterectomies in 2010. [12].
Most studies compared the laparoscopic approach to either the standard laparotomy approach or the vaginal route, result in the laparoscopic approach has been widely accepted as an alternative to standard laparotomy [13].
Each approach has its advantages, disadvantages, and limitations. one of the main limitations of laparoscopic approach of hysterectomy is uterine size larger than 12 weeks. With regression of clinical skills of examination and progress of ultrasound machine leading to replacement of uterine size by uterine weight for definition of enlarged uterus. [14]
There is no consensus on which uterine weight should be accepted as indicating a 'large uterus' Different cut-off values of uterine weight have been accepted in different studies. O'Hanlan et al., ( 2011) used 250 gm as a cut-off value; Yavuzcan et al. (2014) used 280 gm Chiu LH et al., (2015) used 300 gm and Smorgick et al., (2013) used 500 gm Uccella S, Cromi A et al., (2014) suggested that the term 'enlarged uteri' should be used for uteruses > 1000 gm .We used a cut-off value of ≥ 280 gm according to our facilities and experience and analyzed our data accordingly [13,15 ,14 ,16 ,17].
There is scant information in the literature regarding the optimal surgical management, the associated morbidity and the outcomes of laparoscopic hysterectomy in case of enlarged uteri. However, apart from isolated case reports or limited case series [17 ,18 19].
It is common experience that in the everyday clinical setting such big uteri are almost invariably removed by large abdominal incisions. There is no doubt that patients would not chose the abdominal route if they were presented with an alternative that eliminates abdominal wound complications and leaves no visible scars. The low rate of laparoscopic hysterectomies in the Egypt is primarily due to the limited equipment, skills, experience (long learning curve).
The present study we tried to find out that laparoscopic hysterectomy is feasible and safe even in case of enlarged uteri weighing > 280 grams, and that a policy of increasing implementation of laparoscopic approach in this setting is associated with a reduction in terms of blood loss, post-operative hospital stay and peri-operative adverse events. All operations were performed by the same surgeons and using the same technique.
Obesity and co morbidities associated with it are well known factors that negatively affect surgical outcomes. Since higher BMI is a predisposing factor for abnormal uterine bleeding, endometrial hyperplasia, adenomyosis, and so forth, many females of higher BMI may require hysterectomy. In the past, laparoscopy was technically considered challenging in obese patients and was often considered a relative contraindication. But with significant advances in laparoscopic techniques this has come under review [20].
In this study we found there are significant differences in BMI with laparoscopic hysterectomy group having the highest BMI compared to conventional hysterectomy, as the mean of BMI was 29.8±1.4kg/m2. and laparoscopic hysterectomy group, the mean of BMI was 34.3±1.3 kg/m2 which nearest 35 kg/m2 so high BMI is not consider as one of main obstacle in TLH even in enlarged sized uteri.
In this study, the Mean operating time was slightly but not significally lower in laparoscopic hysterectomy group 77.3 ± 7.8 than conventional hysterectomy group 84.7 ± 9.9.however we observe Operative time of laparoscopic group showed considerable improvement with repetition of cases and progression in learning curve allover study.
The operative time of the laparoscopy group showed a wide variation among different authors. The mean operative time in our study was similar to that reported by (70 minutes) with uterus weighting over than 300gm. On the other hand, it was shorter than that reported by reported that operating times (109 minutes), Median operative time was longer in the laparoscopic group (139 minutes) however uterine weight in this study larger than 1000 gm. The shorter duration of laparoscopic group in this study explained using LigaSure vascular sealing system this preserved considerable time in comparison to the traditional ligation of the pedicles and vessels in conventional method [15, 21, 22].
There was highly significant difference in the estimated blood loss among the two groups with laparoscopic hysterectomy group having the least blood loss (110.1 ± 30.8 ml) in comparison to conventional hysterectomy group have blood loss (170 ± 54.4). This significant reduction in blood loss was also reported in most of studies on this literature as in This was explained by pneumoperitoneum compressing microcirculation, better visualization and magnification of smaller vessels added to the usage of LigaSure vascular sealing system [22].
As a consequence of reduced blood loss, the mean Hemoglobin decline 24 hours after surgery was significantly lower in the laparoscopic hysterectomy group (0.7±0.2) compared to the conventional hysterectomy group (1.4±0.9). This was confirmed in many other studies as in [15, 22].
The mean duration of first bowel movement postoperative in laparoscopic hysterectomy group was significantly lower than in conventional hysterectomy group. That significant difference could be explained by less intestinal manipulation, less exposure to dryness. The mean time of hospital stay in the laparoscopic hysterectomy group was significantly lower than in conventional hysterectomy group. Although that significant difference was reported in almost all studies in literature as [22, 17, 21].
As regard the total incidence of intra-operative and postoperative complication of patient submitted to laparoscopic hysterectomy lower than conventional hysterectomy group but not statically significantly. similar to finding in [21,23].
The patient submitted to laparoscopic hysterectomy group for enlarged uterus .There were one patient had left ureteral injury discovered postoperatively in day 5 double J ureteric stent inserted by cystoscopy then removed after two month after complete healing without any complication, abdominal wall hematoma in right ancillary port which resolved conservative and one patient had postoperative febrile morbidity in other side conventional hysterectomy group one patient had bladder injury (During pushing the bladder flap downwards, the injury discovered and repair was done immediately with folly’s catheter insertion for ten days with good healing.) ileus and vaginal stump infection, three patient of wound seroma and infection, five patient with postoperative febrile morbidity.
Total laparoscopic hysterectomy with LigaSure is a suitable effective technique alternative to traditional abdominal hysterectomy when the surgical team is sufficiently trained and experienced in managing complications. However more studies are necessary before this technique can become routinely applicable.
Clearly Auctoresonline and particularly Psychology and Mental Health Care Journal is dedicated to improving health care services for individuals and populations. The editorial boards' ability to efficiently recognize and share the global importance of health literacy with a variety of stakeholders. Auctoresonline publishing platform can be used to facilitate of optimal client-based services and should be added to health care professionals' repertoire of evidence-based health care resources.
Journal of Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Intervention The submission and review process was adequate. However I think that the publication total value should have been enlightened in early fases. Thank you for all.
Journal of Women Health Care and Issues By the present mail, I want to say thank to you and tour colleagues for facilitating my published article. Specially thank you for the peer review process, support from the editorial office. I appreciate positively the quality of your journal.
Journal of Clinical Research and Reports I would be very delighted to submit my testimonial regarding the reviewer board and the editorial office. The reviewer board were accurate and helpful regarding any modifications for my manuscript. And the editorial office were very helpful and supportive in contacting and monitoring with any update and offering help. It was my pleasure to contribute with your promising Journal and I am looking forward for more collaboration.
We would like to thank the Journal of Thoracic Disease and Cardiothoracic Surgery because of the services they provided us for our articles. The peer-review process was done in a very excellent time manner, and the opinions of the reviewers helped us to improve our manuscript further. The editorial office had an outstanding correspondence with us and guided us in many ways. During a hard time of the pandemic that is affecting every one of us tremendously, the editorial office helped us make everything easier for publishing scientific work. Hope for a more scientific relationship with your Journal.
The peer-review process which consisted high quality queries on the paper. I did answer six reviewers’ questions and comments before the paper was accepted. The support from the editorial office is excellent.
Journal of Neuroscience and Neurological Surgery. I had the experience of publishing a research article recently. The whole process was simple from submission to publication. The reviewers made specific and valuable recommendations and corrections that improved the quality of my publication. I strongly recommend this Journal.
Dr. Katarzyna Byczkowska My testimonial covering: "The peer review process is quick and effective. The support from the editorial office is very professional and friendly. Quality of the Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions is scientific and publishes ground-breaking research on cardiology that is useful for other professionals in the field.
Thank you most sincerely, with regard to the support you have given in relation to the reviewing process and the processing of my article entitled "Large Cell Neuroendocrine Carcinoma of The Prostate Gland: A Review and Update" for publication in your esteemed Journal, Journal of Cancer Research and Cellular Therapeutics". The editorial team has been very supportive.
Testimony of Journal of Clinical Otorhinolaryngology: work with your Reviews has been a educational and constructive experience. The editorial office were very helpful and supportive. It was a pleasure to contribute to your Journal.
Dr. Bernard Terkimbi Utoo, I am happy to publish my scientific work in Journal of Women Health Care and Issues (JWHCI). The manuscript submission was seamless and peer review process was top notch. I was amazed that 4 reviewers worked on the manuscript which made it a highly technical, standard and excellent quality paper. I appreciate the format and consideration for the APC as well as the speed of publication. It is my pleasure to continue with this scientific relationship with the esteem JWHCI.
This is an acknowledgment for peer reviewers, editorial board of Journal of Clinical Research and Reports. They show a lot of consideration for us as publishers for our research article “Evaluation of the different factors associated with side effects of COVID-19 vaccination on medical students, Mutah university, Al-Karak, Jordan”, in a very professional and easy way. This journal is one of outstanding medical journal.
Dear Hao Jiang, to Journal of Nutrition and Food Processing We greatly appreciate the efficient, professional and rapid processing of our paper by your team. If there is anything else we should do, please do not hesitate to let us know. On behalf of my co-authors, we would like to express our great appreciation to editor and reviewers.
As an author who has recently published in the journal "Brain and Neurological Disorders". I am delighted to provide a testimonial on the peer review process, editorial office support, and the overall quality of the journal. The peer review process at Brain and Neurological Disorders is rigorous and meticulous, ensuring that only high-quality, evidence-based research is published. The reviewers are experts in their fields, and their comments and suggestions were constructive and helped improve the quality of my manuscript. The review process was timely and efficient, with clear communication from the editorial office at each stage. The support from the editorial office was exceptional throughout the entire process. The editorial staff was responsive, professional, and always willing to help. They provided valuable guidance on formatting, structure, and ethical considerations, making the submission process seamless. Moreover, they kept me informed about the status of my manuscript and provided timely updates, which made the process less stressful. The journal Brain and Neurological Disorders is of the highest quality, with a strong focus on publishing cutting-edge research in the field of neurology. The articles published in this journal are well-researched, rigorously peer-reviewed, and written by experts in the field. The journal maintains high standards, ensuring that readers are provided with the most up-to-date and reliable information on brain and neurological disorders. In conclusion, I had a wonderful experience publishing in Brain and Neurological Disorders. The peer review process was thorough, the editorial office provided exceptional support, and the journal's quality is second to none. I would highly recommend this journal to any researcher working in the field of neurology and brain disorders.
Dear Agrippa Hilda, Journal of Neuroscience and Neurological Surgery, Editorial Coordinator, I trust this message finds you well. I want to extend my appreciation for considering my article for publication in your esteemed journal. I am pleased to provide a testimonial regarding the peer review process and the support received from your editorial office. The peer review process for my paper was carried out in a highly professional and thorough manner. The feedback and comments provided by the authors were constructive and very useful in improving the quality of the manuscript. This rigorous assessment process undoubtedly contributes to the high standards maintained by your journal.
International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews. I strongly recommend to consider submitting your work to this high-quality journal. The support and availability of the Editorial staff is outstanding and the review process was both efficient and rigorous.
Thank you very much for publishing my Research Article titled “Comparing Treatment Outcome Of Allergic Rhinitis Patients After Using Fluticasone Nasal Spray And Nasal Douching" in the Journal of Clinical Otorhinolaryngology. As Medical Professionals we are immensely benefited from study of various informative Articles and Papers published in this high quality Journal. I look forward to enriching my knowledge by regular study of the Journal and contribute my future work in the field of ENT through the Journal for use by the medical fraternity. The support from the Editorial office was excellent and very prompt. I also welcome the comments received from the readers of my Research Article.
Dear Erica Kelsey, Editorial Coordinator of Cancer Research and Cellular Therapeutics Our team is very satisfied with the processing of our paper by your journal. That was fast, efficient, rigorous, but without unnecessary complications. We appreciated the very short time between the submission of the paper and its publication on line on your site.
I am very glad to say that the peer review process is very successful and fast and support from the Editorial Office. Therefore, I would like to continue our scientific relationship for a long time. And I especially thank you for your kindly attention towards my article. Have a good day!
"We recently published an article entitled “Influence of beta-Cyclodextrins upon the Degradation of Carbofuran Derivatives under Alkaline Conditions" in the Journal of “Pesticides and Biofertilizers” to show that the cyclodextrins protect the carbamates increasing their half-life time in the presence of basic conditions This will be very helpful to understand carbofuran behaviour in the analytical, agro-environmental and food areas. We greatly appreciated the interaction with the editor and the editorial team; we were particularly well accompanied during the course of the revision process, since all various steps towards publication were short and without delay".
I would like to express my gratitude towards you process of article review and submission. I found this to be very fair and expedient. Your follow up has been excellent. I have many publications in national and international journal and your process has been one of the best so far. Keep up the great work.
We are grateful for this opportunity to provide a glowing recommendation to the Journal of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy. We found that the editorial team were very supportive, helpful, kept us abreast of timelines and over all very professional in nature. The peer review process was rigorous, efficient and constructive that really enhanced our article submission. The experience with this journal remains one of our best ever and we look forward to providing future submissions in the near future.
I am very pleased to serve as EBM of the journal, I hope many years of my experience in stem cells can help the journal from one way or another. As we know, stem cells hold great potential for regenerative medicine, which are mostly used to promote the repair response of diseased, dysfunctional or injured tissue using stem cells or their derivatives. I think Stem Cell Research and Therapeutics International is a great platform to publish and share the understanding towards the biology and translational or clinical application of stem cells.
I would like to give my testimony in the support I have got by the peer review process and to support the editorial office where they were of asset to support young author like me to be encouraged to publish their work in your respected journal and globalize and share knowledge across the globe. I really give my great gratitude to your journal and the peer review including the editorial office.
I am delighted to publish our manuscript entitled "A Perspective on Cocaine Induced Stroke - Its Mechanisms and Management" in the Journal of Neuroscience and Neurological Surgery. The peer review process, support from the editorial office, and quality of the journal are excellent. The manuscripts published are of high quality and of excellent scientific value. I recommend this journal very much to colleagues.
Dr.Tania Muñoz, My experience as researcher and author of a review article in The Journal Clinical Cardiology and Interventions has been very enriching and stimulating. The editorial team is excellent, performs its work with absolute responsibility and delivery. They are proactive, dynamic and receptive to all proposals. Supporting at all times the vast universe of authors who choose them as an option for publication. The team of review specialists, members of the editorial board, are brilliant professionals, with remarkable performance in medical research and scientific methodology. Together they form a frontline team that consolidates the JCCI as a magnificent option for the publication and review of high-level medical articles and broad collective interest. I am honored to be able to share my review article and open to receive all your comments.
“The peer review process of JPMHC is quick and effective. Authors are benefited by good and professional reviewers with huge experience in the field of psychology and mental health. The support from the editorial office is very professional. People to contact to are friendly and happy to help and assist any query authors might have. Quality of the Journal is scientific and publishes ground-breaking research on mental health that is useful for other professionals in the field”.
Dear editorial department: On behalf of our team, I hereby certify the reliability and superiority of the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews in the peer review process, editorial support, and journal quality. Firstly, the peer review process of the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews is rigorous, fair, transparent, fast, and of high quality. The editorial department invites experts from relevant fields as anonymous reviewers to review all submitted manuscripts. These experts have rich academic backgrounds and experience, and can accurately evaluate the academic quality, originality, and suitability of manuscripts. The editorial department is committed to ensuring the rigor of the peer review process, while also making every effort to ensure a fast review cycle to meet the needs of authors and the academic community. Secondly, the editorial team of the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews is composed of a group of senior scholars and professionals with rich experience and professional knowledge in related fields. The editorial department is committed to assisting authors in improving their manuscripts, ensuring their academic accuracy, clarity, and completeness. Editors actively collaborate with authors, providing useful suggestions and feedback to promote the improvement and development of the manuscript. We believe that the support of the editorial department is one of the key factors in ensuring the quality of the journal. Finally, the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews is renowned for its high- quality articles and strict academic standards. The editorial department is committed to publishing innovative and academically valuable research results to promote the development and progress of related fields. The International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews is reasonably priced and ensures excellent service and quality ratio, allowing authors to obtain high-level academic publishing opportunities in an affordable manner. I hereby solemnly declare that the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews has a high level of credibility and superiority in terms of peer review process, editorial support, reasonable fees, and journal quality. Sincerely, Rui Tao.
Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions I testity the covering of the peer review process, support from the editorial office, and quality of the journal.
