Sinha 2005.

Methods	Single centre study Allocation by computer‐generated random numbers Unblinded Power calculation: not performed 8.3% (4/48) patients excluded because of difficulties which led to them receiving the treatment of the intervention arm and not the control arm as randomised Intention‐to‐treat analysis: not performed Source of funding: not mentioned
Participants	Setting: private endoscopy centre, Mumbai, India Inclusion criteria: uterus larger than 12 weeks on bimanual examination, ultrasound confirmation of presence of at least one myoma 7 cm or greater and/or presence of three or more myomas greater than 5 cm in size Exclusion criteria: submucosal myoma, associated ovarian lesions or other pathology discovered by ultrasound exam, a history of surgery n = 48 Mean age: 32.95 years (SD 4.65) in treatment arm and 33.8 years (SD 6.35) in control arm Ethnicity: not described Sizes of myomas: the mean size of the myoma was 7.6 cm (SD 4.2) in treatment arm and 7.6 cm (SD 4. 5) in the control arm
Interventions	Treatment arm (n = 24): enucleation of myoma by morcellation while still attached to uterus Control arm (n = 20): conventional technique of complete enucleation followed by morcellation Type of operation: laparoscopy
Outcomes	Perioperative blood loss, hospital stay, and length of surgery Perioperative blood loss estimated by consistently sucking the blood into a suction bottle without any irrigation until the intracorporeal suturing was completed and the haemostasis confirmed
Notes	Indications for myomectomy: symptomatic myomas Authors not contacted
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Low risk	Allocation by computer‐generated random numbers
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Low risk	Adequate
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes	High risk	8.3% (4/48) patients excluded because of difficulties which led to them receiving the treatment of the intervention arm and not the control arm as randomised.
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	Unclear risk	We do not have access to the study protocol
Other bias	Low risk	No other sources of bias identified
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes	High risk	Unblinded
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes	High risk	Unblinded