Study of Conventional Laparoscopic Hysterectomy Versus Robot-Assisted Laparoscopic Hysterectomy at a Teaching Institution
Public ClinicalTrials.gov record NCT01581905. Field values are reproduced from the official study page; the official ClinicalTrials.gov record remains the source of truth for eligibility, enrollment, and contact information.
Data is sourced from official ClinicalTrials.gov public API records. Always review the official ClinicalTrials.gov record for the latest information.
Official title
A Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing Conventional Laparoscopic Hysterectomy With Robot-Assisted Laparoscopic Hysterectomy at a Teaching Institution
Brief summary
Reproduced verbatim from the official ClinicalTrials.gov record. Not medical advice.
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.
Study identification
- NCT ID
- NCT01581905
- Recruitment status
- Terminated
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Not applicable
- Enrollment
- 98 participants
Conditions and interventions
Interventions
- Conventional Laparoscopic Hysterectomy (LH) Procedure
- Robot Assisted Hysterectomy Procedure
Procedure
Eligibility (public fields only)
- Age range
- 18 Years to 80 Years
- Sex
- Female
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepts healthy volunteers
This page does not interpret eligibility. Detailed inclusion and exclusion criteria are on the official ClinicalTrials.gov record.
Study timeline
- Start date
- Feb 29, 2012
- Primary completion
- Feb 28, 2013
- Completion
- May 31, 2013
- Last update posted
- Jan 19, 2017
2012 – 2013
United States locations
- U.S. sites
- 1
- U.S. states
- 1
- U.S. cities
- 1
| Facility | City | State | ZIP | Site status |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Penn State Milton S. Hershey Medical Center | Hershey | Pennsylvania | 17033 | — |
Site contact phone numbers, emails, and investigator names are intentionally not displayed here. Open the official ClinicalTrials.gov record for site contact information.
About this trial record page
- What this page shows
- Public field values for ClinicalTrials.gov record NCT01581905, including study identification, conditions, interventions, eligibility (age, sex, healthy volunteer), timeline, and U.S. site list.
- What this page does not do
- No medical advice, eligibility judgments, treatment recommendations, study quality scoring, or AI-generated medical summaries. No site contact phone numbers, emails, or investigator names.
- Where the data comes from
- Sourced from the official ClinicalTrials.gov public API. The official record is the source of truth.
- Last refresh
- Last update posted Jan 19, 2017 · Synced Sep 7, 2026
Related: full search, browse by condition, browse by drug or therapy, browse by sponsor, browse by U.S. city.
Open the official record
The complete protocol, eligibility criteria, and contact information for NCT01581905 live on ClinicalTrials.gov.