Volume : 5
Issue : 1
Online ISSN : 2394-2754
Print ISSN : 2394-2746
Article First Page : 89
Article End Page : 92
Introduction: Prior to medical advances in yester years VH was limited to uterine prolapse but in present techno-medical era the techniques and indications of vaginal hysterectomy have changed to give an excellent health care to women cosmetically at a reasonable cost with minimum invasion and maximum safety and satisfaction.
Aims and objective: The aim of the study was to find out the answer of the question, IS REALLY TLH LESS INVASIVE THEN NDVH? By analyzing these two commonly performed procedures to find out the differences to decide whether NDVH is a simpler, less invasive, quicker, cost effective, environment friendly technique then TLH in the similar gynecological indications.
Materials and Methods: A retrospective study was done on 120 randomly selected patient of Hysterectomy for various reasons between March 2016 till September 2017 in Dept. of Ob/Gyn LNMC JKH, Bhopal. Patients' original files and surgery reports of the TLH and VH were analyzed and compared retrospectively for the indication of surgery, patients' age, weight, parity, uterus size, time taken for surgery, blood loss, post-operative analgesia, hospital stay, Intra and post op complications. A stastical analysis of the data was performed using independent t test and p value of less than 0.01 was considered statically significant.
Results: The mean time taken to perform TLH was significantly longer i.e. 184.83 minutes compared with NDVH, i.e. 83.5.minutes (p<0.004). Rate of conversion to AH was more with TLH due to haemorrhage in 3 and bladder injury in one of our cases, in comparison two cases in NDVH due to rectal and bladder injury. Blood loss in both the surgery was comparable as mean post op Hb in both group were 9.5 & 9.8 with no significant p value. Mean Pain score measured by VAS after 24 hours of surgery in TLH was 5.4+-2.02 and in NDVH was 3.57 +-1.3 after test of significance the p value was significant[<0.001] Proves that pain was less in NDVH than TLH. Duration of stay in the hospital was almost the same for both groups. Cost of surgery was more with TLH in comparison to NDVH.
Conclusion: NDVH was as less invasive as TLH with the advantages of no visible scar on the abdomen, done under regional anaesthesia with routine instruments, less pain, less medication, less operative time, thus faster recovery so should be the first option whenever minimally invasive scar less hysterectomies is desired for similar indications.
Keyword: NDVH, Key hole, Scarless, Regional anaesthesia, TLH, Minimally invasive, Environment friendly.