Cargando…
Randomized Comparison Between Two Microlaparoscopic Techniques for Partial Salpingectomy
OBJECTIVE: We compared 2 techniques for performing a partial salpingectomy by using microlaparoscopy and either bipolar coagulation or loop ligation. METHODS: A 3-mm transumbilical laparoscope with secondary midline port sites midway and suprapubically was used to perform a partial salpingectomy in...
Autores principales: | , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons
2005
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3015551/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15791966 |
_version_ | 1782195542047064064 |
---|---|
author | Siegle, John C. Bishop, Laura J. Rayburn, William F. |
author_facet | Siegle, John C. Bishop, Laura J. Rayburn, William F. |
author_sort | Siegle, John C. |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVE: We compared 2 techniques for performing a partial salpingectomy by using microlaparoscopy and either bipolar coagulation or loop ligation. METHODS: A 3-mm transumbilical laparoscope with secondary midline port sites midway and suprapubically was used to perform a partial salpingectomy in 109 women desiring permanent sterilization. Each patient was randomly assigned to undergo a tubal resection either after Pomeroy ligation (n=54) or after bipolar coagulation with Kleppinger forceps (n=55). Postoperative pain, as assessed using a 10-point visual analog scale, was the primary comparison endpoint. RESULTS: No technical difficulties with either technique required conversion to a minilaparotomy. The mean time to remove both tubal segments was not different between techniques (7 minutes, 21 seconds; range, 4 minutes, 25 seconds to 15 minutes, 43 seconds). Each segment (mean, 1.6 cm; range, 0.8 to 3.5 cm) was confirmed in the operating room, then histologically. Postoperative pain at 6 hours was scored similarly (median, ligation 4.6, coagulation 4.0 of 10). Outpatient recovery was the same, unless pelvic pain required overnight observation (ligation, 4 patients; coagulation, 2 patients). CONCLUSION: Partial salpingectomy, using microlaparos-copy with either bipolar coagulation or loop ligation, was performed with comparable ease, confirmation of the removed tube, and similar postoperative discomfort. |
format | Text |
id | pubmed-3015551 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2005 |
publisher | Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-30155512011-02-17 Randomized Comparison Between Two Microlaparoscopic Techniques for Partial Salpingectomy Siegle, John C. Bishop, Laura J. Rayburn, William F. JSLS Scientific Papers OBJECTIVE: We compared 2 techniques for performing a partial salpingectomy by using microlaparoscopy and either bipolar coagulation or loop ligation. METHODS: A 3-mm transumbilical laparoscope with secondary midline port sites midway and suprapubically was used to perform a partial salpingectomy in 109 women desiring permanent sterilization. Each patient was randomly assigned to undergo a tubal resection either after Pomeroy ligation (n=54) or after bipolar coagulation with Kleppinger forceps (n=55). Postoperative pain, as assessed using a 10-point visual analog scale, was the primary comparison endpoint. RESULTS: No technical difficulties with either technique required conversion to a minilaparotomy. The mean time to remove both tubal segments was not different between techniques (7 minutes, 21 seconds; range, 4 minutes, 25 seconds to 15 minutes, 43 seconds). Each segment (mean, 1.6 cm; range, 0.8 to 3.5 cm) was confirmed in the operating room, then histologically. Postoperative pain at 6 hours was scored similarly (median, ligation 4.6, coagulation 4.0 of 10). Outpatient recovery was the same, unless pelvic pain required overnight observation (ligation, 4 patients; coagulation, 2 patients). CONCLUSION: Partial salpingectomy, using microlaparos-copy with either bipolar coagulation or loop ligation, was performed with comparable ease, confirmation of the removed tube, and similar postoperative discomfort. Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons 2005 /pmc/articles/PMC3015551/ /pubmed/15791966 Text en © 2005 by JSLS, Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial No Derivatives License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/), which permits for noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited and is not altered in any way. |
spellingShingle | Scientific Papers Siegle, John C. Bishop, Laura J. Rayburn, William F. Randomized Comparison Between Two Microlaparoscopic Techniques for Partial Salpingectomy |
title | Randomized Comparison Between Two Microlaparoscopic Techniques for Partial Salpingectomy |
title_full | Randomized Comparison Between Two Microlaparoscopic Techniques for Partial Salpingectomy |
title_fullStr | Randomized Comparison Between Two Microlaparoscopic Techniques for Partial Salpingectomy |
title_full_unstemmed | Randomized Comparison Between Two Microlaparoscopic Techniques for Partial Salpingectomy |
title_short | Randomized Comparison Between Two Microlaparoscopic Techniques for Partial Salpingectomy |
title_sort | randomized comparison between two microlaparoscopic techniques for partial salpingectomy |
topic | Scientific Papers |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3015551/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15791966 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT sieglejohnc randomizedcomparisonbetweentwomicrolaparoscopictechniquesforpartialsalpingectomy AT bishoplauraj randomizedcomparisonbetweentwomicrolaparoscopictechniquesforpartialsalpingectomy AT rayburnwilliamf randomizedcomparisonbetweentwomicrolaparoscopictechniquesforpartialsalpingectomy |