You are here

Article Text

Article menu
Download PDFPDF
Therapeutics
Randomised controlled trial
Unclear whether energy-based vessel sealing in vaginal hysterectomy is superior to conventional clamping and suturing
  1. Jamie Kroft1,
  2. Amanda Selk2
  1. 1 Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
  2. 2 Department of Gynaecology, Women's College Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
  1. Correspondence to : Jamie Kroft
    Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, 2075 Bayview Ave, Suite C703, Toronto, Ontario, Canada M4N 3M5; Jamie.kroft{at}utoronto.ca

https://doi.org/10.1136/eb-2012-101172

Statistics from Altmetric.com

    Request Permissions

    If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

    Commentary on: Lakeman M, The S, Schellart R, et al. Electrosurgical bipolar vessel sealing versus conventional clamping and suturing for vaginal hysterectomy: a randomised controlled trial. BJOG 2012;119:1473–82.OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed

    Context

    Although vaginal hysterectomy (VH) is the preferred route for treatment of benign disease,1 it can be technically challenging. Energy-based vessel-sealing devices (EBVSD) allow for rapid sequential tissue and vessel sealing and transection of the vascular pedicle in one handheld tool.2 A recent meta-analysis suggested that EBVSDs may decrease operating time, blood loss and hospital stay, but results were limited due to the quality of included studies.3

    Methods

    This multicentre randomised controlled trial of 100 women, comparing the Ligasure™ bipolar vessel-sealing device with conventional suturing for VH was performed in eight academic centres in the Netherlands. The primary objective of the study was to compare the …

    View Full Text

    Footnotes

    • Competing interests None.