Background: Monocyte / High Density Lipoprotein Ratio (MHR) has become an inflammation marker of atherosclerotic cardiovascular diseases and is a handy and reliable diagnostic marker at a low cost. Objectives: to suggest MHR as a new inflammation marker for ASCVDs by comparing it with other risk factors of cardiovascular disease and assessing the significance in screening Methods: This study conducted during October to December 2019 is a hospital-based cross sectional study, with a total of 396 clients, all 20 to 64 years old, were selected as subjects of the study using a certain criteria. Results: 78.47% of the male subjects and 34.31% of female subjects were diagnosed with dislipidemia, which shows us that males were diagnosed more frequently. The study sample consisted of 274 (72.87%) men and 102 (27.13%) women with mean age of 36.6±8.42 years (range, 20-64 years), 78.47% were male and 34.31% were females. 66.49% of total participants were newly diagnosed with dyslipidemia. An age group of 30 to 40 years old were recorded with the highest cases of dyslipidemia. Monocyte / High Density Lipoprotein Ratio (MHR) were 7.88 and 12.82 in dyslipidemic and non-dyslipidemic subjects, respectively and showed that there is a statistically significant difference(p<0.05). The 10-year ASCVD risk of 113 people aged 40-64 years, which were classified in low risk group (<7.5%) and in high risk group (≥7.5%) were assessed by pooled cohort equation and the results shows that risk percentage were 65.14% and 34.86% and there is statistically significant difference in MHR, which were 10.58±4.80 and 14.07±4. 90 in respective groups. Conclusions Prevalence of dyslipidemia in preventive screening were high in a group of 20-62 years old and the group of those were estimated high The 10-year ASCVD risk, also had relatively higher MHR. Moreover, there is a positive relation between dyslipidemia and MHR. These results show that it is possible to use MHR as a new inflammation marker in ASCVDs for early detection purpose.

Hysterectomy is still the most common major operation performed by gynecologists. Having said that the incidence of hysterectomy has increased last 20 years with new minimally invasive technique. Laparoscopy assisted vaginal hysterectomy has advantage like small incision, less operative pain, quicker recovery, less hospital stay comparing to the abdominal open surgery. Objective: To compare the outcome of abdominal hysterectomy and laparoscopic vaginal hysterectomy.The study population comprised all patients who had LAVH and abdominal hysterectomy at First Maternity Hospital, from June 2013 to December 2014.The mean age of both group is same (46.2±5.3). Duration time of LAVH is approximately 2.30±-5.9minutes and of total abdominal hysterectomy is a 1.41±2.7 minute. The general blood loss during LAVH is 74.4±19 ml and during total abdominal hysterectomy is 185.2 ± 67 ml. After LAVH any patient had no complaints. After LAVH the patient stayed at the hospital for 3 days. LAVH took significantly longer operating time than TAH. Blood loss was jess during LAVH. Hospital stay after LAVH was less than TAH. Drug cost is more case LAVH.