Laparoscopic versus open myomectomy: a double-blind study to evaluate XXXX .

@entity1 @entity1868 @entity282 @entity158
The advantages of laparoscopic over open surgery have been documented in nonblinded settings. Our prospective, double-blind setting evaluated @entity158 scores 72 h after surgery by comparing @entity1 who underwent laparoscopic myomectomy or with laparotomy. Forty @entity1 referred for conservative myomectomy were included in the study. After stratification ( @entity1868 size, number of @entity1868 , and surgeon), @entity1 were randomized to either laparoscopy (n = 19) or laparotomy (n = 21) and received a standardized anesthesia and @entity1 -controlled analgesia for 24 h after surgery. Identical wound dressings were applied to blind the @entity1 and the observer to the surgical approach. The @entity282 scores were documented on a visual analog scale (VAS; 0 = no and 10 = unbearable @entity158 ) at 24, 48, and 72 h after surgery. As the primary outcome variable, we calculated the mean overall VAS-score at these time points. P < 0.05 (t-test and analysis of covariance) was considered statistically significant. There were no differences in @entity1 characteristics among the groups. The mean overall VAS score at 24, 48, and 72 h was statistically significantly lower in the laparoscopic group compared with the laparotomy group (2.28 +/- 1.38 versus 4.03 +/- 1.63; P < 0.01). Our data demonstrate, for the first time in a double-blind setting, that laparoscopic myomectomy reduces @entity282 for 72 h after surgery compared with laparotomy.
