findmyKOL
Clinical trialNCT01581905TerminatedInterventional

Study of Conventional Laparoscopic Hysterectomy Versus Robot-Assisted Laparoscopic Hysterectomy at a Teaching Institution

SponsorMilton S. Hershey Medical CenterEnrollment98Dysfunctional Uterine BleedingEndometriosisLeiomyomaMenorrhagiaPelvic Pain
View the registry record on ClinicalTrials.gov

Summary

The lay summary the sponsor registered on ClinicalTrials.gov.

Approximately 600,000 women undergo hysterectomy each year in the United States, of which 12% are laparoscopic. The most common indications for hysterectomy are: symptomatic uterine leiomyomas (40.7%), endometriosis (17.7%), and prolapse (14.5%). The first total laparoscopic hysterectomy was performed by Reich et al in 1988. Many studies have proven that laparoscopic hysterectomy is associated with lower preoperative morbidity, shorter hospital stay, and shorter recovery times than abdominal hysterectomy. The literature has also shown the complication rates for laparoscopic cases are similar to open procedures in the hands of an experienced laparoscopic surgeon. The American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists Committee on Gynecologic Practice state that laparoscopic hysterectomy is an alternative to abdominal hysterectomy for those patients in whom vaginal hysterectomy is not indicated or feasible. The ACOG Committee on Gynecologic Practice site multiple advantages of laparoscopic hysterectomy to abdominal hysterectomy including faster recovery, shorter hospital stay, less blood loss, and fewer abdominal wall/wound infections. Despite the recommendations of ACOG for a more minimally invasive approach, 66% of all hysterectomies are performed abdominally. Key reasons for the lag in utilization of laparoscopic techniques are the technical obstacles of performing minimally invasive hysterectomies. Robotic technology has emerged as a means to decrease the learning curve and increase the availability of minimally invasive surgery to patients. A current review of the literature reveals no randomized trials evaluating the efficacy of conventional laparoscopic hysterectomy vs. robot-assisted laparoscopic hysterectomy. The investigator's aim is to address this void. The primary objective of this study is to determine whether Robot-Assisted Laparoscopic Hysterectomy is equivalent to Conventional Laparoscopic Hysterectomy with respect to operative time, blood loss, and hospital stay. The investigator's secondary objective was to assess the cost, morbidity, and mortality of each procedure.

Investigators

The overall officials registered on this study. Names that resolve to a findmyKOL profile link to it; the rest are shown as registered.

A profile link is shown only when the registered name resolves to a person record with a confident, namesake-checked match; ambiguous names stay unlinked.

Sites

1 registered facility, with the per-site recruitment status where the registry publishes one. ClinicalTrials.gov does not publish per-site enrollment counts.

United States
  • Penn State Milton S. Hershey Medical Center

    Hershey, Pennsylvania, United States

Site investigator names are published by ClinicalTrials.gov only while a study recruits, so completed studies list sites without them.

Drugs studied

No drug or biological interventions are in our data for this study — it may test a procedure, device or behavioral intervention, or the intervention list isn't in our current snapshot. See the registry record ↗. Why? →

Registration & key dates

Registry attributes as recorded on the ClinicalTrials.gov study record.

Start
31 Mar 2012
Primary completion
31 Mar 2013
Completion
30 Jun 2013
Last update posted
20 Jan 2017
Registered enrollment
98
Registry id
NCT01581905

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov, via the CTTI AACT database, data as of 24 Aug 2026. Registry facts are shown as registered by the study sponsor; findmyKOL does not interpret them.