Estudo comparativo de vias de acesso cirúrgico na contracepção cirúrgica feminina: Microlaparoscopia versus minilaparotomia
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2006 |
Outros Autores: | , , , |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | por |
Título da fonte: | Repositório Institucional da UNESP |
Texto Completo: | http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S0100-72032006000700005 http://hdl.handle.net/11449/68941 |
Resumo: | Purpose: to compare in a retrospective way, 51 women who underwent tubal ligation, 30 through microlaparoascopy (Gmicrol) and 21 through minilaparotomy (Gminil). Methods: the analyzed parameters were: total time for accomplishment of the procedure and the surgical technique, time of hospital stay and return to the habitual activities after the surgery, postoperative pain, morbidity, satisfaction degree and esthetic effect, considering values of p<0,05 as significant, and also standard cost. Results: Gmicrol took less time to accomplish the surgery than the Gminil (43 against 57 minutes respectively, p<0,05), less time to accomplish the surgical technique (6.48 against 30.32 minutes respectively, p<0,05), and lower hospital stay (9,90 hours as against 41,7 hours respectively, p <0,05). There was no significant difference between the two groups regarding time to return to the habitual activities after surgery. To evaluate postoperative pain, a scale of 0-10 it was applied. Gmicrol present a lower pain score on the 1st and 2nd postoperative days (1.13 and 0.26 to Gmicrol and 4.52 and 1.14 to Gminil, respectively, p<0,05). There was no significant difference between immediate postoperative the most common complaint being pain at the site of pain and that on the 3rd postoperative day. Gminil presented a higher morbidity rate incision. To evaluate the satisfaction degree and esthetic effect, numeric values were attributed to as good, regular, poor and very bad as answered by the patiets. Gmicrol presented a higher satisfaction degree (p<0,05) and better esthetic effect as compared to Gminil (p <0,05). The microlaparoscopy standard cost was R$ 109.30 being lower than that of minilaparotomy. Conclusions: tubal ligation by microlaparoscopy, under local anesthesia and conscious sedation presented some advantages compared to minilaparotomy. |
id |
UNSP_6b7b1c8d1dff37ec20c83a99594f9202 |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:repositorio.unesp.br:11449/68941 |
network_acronym_str |
UNSP |
network_name_str |
Repositório Institucional da UNESP |
repository_id_str |
2946 |
spelling |
Estudo comparativo de vias de acesso cirúrgico na contracepção cirúrgica feminina: Microlaparoscopia versus minilaparotomiaComparative study of female surgery contraception access: Microlaparoscopy versus minilaparotomyContraceptionLaparoscopy/methodsLaparotomy/methodsRetrospective studiesSterilizationTubal/methodsPurpose: to compare in a retrospective way, 51 women who underwent tubal ligation, 30 through microlaparoascopy (Gmicrol) and 21 through minilaparotomy (Gminil). Methods: the analyzed parameters were: total time for accomplishment of the procedure and the surgical technique, time of hospital stay and return to the habitual activities after the surgery, postoperative pain, morbidity, satisfaction degree and esthetic effect, considering values of p<0,05 as significant, and also standard cost. Results: Gmicrol took less time to accomplish the surgery than the Gminil (43 against 57 minutes respectively, p<0,05), less time to accomplish the surgical technique (6.48 against 30.32 minutes respectively, p<0,05), and lower hospital stay (9,90 hours as against 41,7 hours respectively, p <0,05). There was no significant difference between the two groups regarding time to return to the habitual activities after surgery. To evaluate postoperative pain, a scale of 0-10 it was applied. Gmicrol present a lower pain score on the 1st and 2nd postoperative days (1.13 and 0.26 to Gmicrol and 4.52 and 1.14 to Gminil, respectively, p<0,05). There was no significant difference between immediate postoperative the most common complaint being pain at the site of pain and that on the 3rd postoperative day. Gminil presented a higher morbidity rate incision. To evaluate the satisfaction degree and esthetic effect, numeric values were attributed to as good, regular, poor and very bad as answered by the patiets. Gmicrol presented a higher satisfaction degree (p<0,05) and better esthetic effect as compared to Gminil (p <0,05). The microlaparoscopy standard cost was R$ 109.30 being lower than that of minilaparotomy. Conclusions: tubal ligation by microlaparoscopy, under local anesthesia and conscious sedation presented some advantages compared to minilaparotomy.Programa de Pós-Graduação em Ginecologia, Obstetrícia e Mastologia Faculdade de Medicina de Botucatu Universidade Estadual Paulista Júlio Mesquita Filho UNESP, Botucatu (SP)Bioestatística Faculdade de Ciências e Letras de Assis Universidade Estadual Paulista Júlio Mesquita Filho UNESP, Assis (SP)Departamento de Ginecologia, Obstetrícia e Mastologia Faculdade de Medicina de Botucatu Universidade Estadual Paulista Júlio Mesquita Filho UNESP, Botucatu (SP), R. Nagila Jubran - 40 - Jd. Europa, 19840-470 - Assis - SPPrograma de Pós-Graduação em Ginecologia, Obstetrícia e Mastologia Faculdade de Medicina de Botucatu Universidade Estadual Paulista Júlio Mesquita Filho UNESP, Botucatu (SP)Bioestatística Faculdade de Ciências e Letras de Assis Universidade Estadual Paulista Júlio Mesquita Filho UNESP, Assis (SP)Departamento de Ginecologia, Obstetrícia e Mastologia Faculdade de Medicina de Botucatu Universidade Estadual Paulista Júlio Mesquita Filho UNESP, Botucatu (SP)Universidade Estadual Paulista (Unesp)Modotte, Waldir Pereira [UNESP]Dias, Rogerio [UNESP]Frei, Fernando [UNESP]Dias, Daniel Spadoto [UNESP]Fernandes, Flávio Ferreira [UNESP]2014-05-27T11:21:53Z2014-05-27T11:21:53Z2006-07-01info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/article403-409application/pdfhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S0100-72032006000700005Revista Brasileira de Ginecologia e Obstetricia, v. 28, n. 7, p. 403-409, 2006.0100-7203http://hdl.handle.net/11449/6894110.1590/S0100-72032006000700005S0100-720320060007000052-s2.0-338455031102-s2.0-33845503110.pdf9476843874583499Scopusreponame:Repositório Institucional da UNESPinstname:Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)instacron:UNESPporRevista Brasileira de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia0,292info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess2024-08-16T14:07:22Zoai:repositorio.unesp.br:11449/68941Repositório InstitucionalPUBhttp://repositorio.unesp.br/oai/requestopendoar:29462024-08-16T14:07:22Repositório Institucional da UNESP - Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)false |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Estudo comparativo de vias de acesso cirúrgico na contracepção cirúrgica feminina: Microlaparoscopia versus minilaparotomia Comparative study of female surgery contraception access: Microlaparoscopy versus minilaparotomy |
title |
Estudo comparativo de vias de acesso cirúrgico na contracepção cirúrgica feminina: Microlaparoscopia versus minilaparotomia |
spellingShingle |
Estudo comparativo de vias de acesso cirúrgico na contracepção cirúrgica feminina: Microlaparoscopia versus minilaparotomia Modotte, Waldir Pereira [UNESP] Contraception Laparoscopy/methods Laparotomy/methods Retrospective studies Sterilization Tubal/methods |
title_short |
Estudo comparativo de vias de acesso cirúrgico na contracepção cirúrgica feminina: Microlaparoscopia versus minilaparotomia |
title_full |
Estudo comparativo de vias de acesso cirúrgico na contracepção cirúrgica feminina: Microlaparoscopia versus minilaparotomia |
title_fullStr |
Estudo comparativo de vias de acesso cirúrgico na contracepção cirúrgica feminina: Microlaparoscopia versus minilaparotomia |
title_full_unstemmed |
Estudo comparativo de vias de acesso cirúrgico na contracepção cirúrgica feminina: Microlaparoscopia versus minilaparotomia |
title_sort |
Estudo comparativo de vias de acesso cirúrgico na contracepção cirúrgica feminina: Microlaparoscopia versus minilaparotomia |
author |
Modotte, Waldir Pereira [UNESP] |
author_facet |
Modotte, Waldir Pereira [UNESP] Dias, Rogerio [UNESP] Frei, Fernando [UNESP] Dias, Daniel Spadoto [UNESP] Fernandes, Flávio Ferreira [UNESP] |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Dias, Rogerio [UNESP] Frei, Fernando [UNESP] Dias, Daniel Spadoto [UNESP] Fernandes, Flávio Ferreira [UNESP] |
author2_role |
author author author author |
dc.contributor.none.fl_str_mv |
Universidade Estadual Paulista (Unesp) |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Modotte, Waldir Pereira [UNESP] Dias, Rogerio [UNESP] Frei, Fernando [UNESP] Dias, Daniel Spadoto [UNESP] Fernandes, Flávio Ferreira [UNESP] |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
Contraception Laparoscopy/methods Laparotomy/methods Retrospective studies Sterilization Tubal/methods |
topic |
Contraception Laparoscopy/methods Laparotomy/methods Retrospective studies Sterilization Tubal/methods |
description |
Purpose: to compare in a retrospective way, 51 women who underwent tubal ligation, 30 through microlaparoascopy (Gmicrol) and 21 through minilaparotomy (Gminil). Methods: the analyzed parameters were: total time for accomplishment of the procedure and the surgical technique, time of hospital stay and return to the habitual activities after the surgery, postoperative pain, morbidity, satisfaction degree and esthetic effect, considering values of p<0,05 as significant, and also standard cost. Results: Gmicrol took less time to accomplish the surgery than the Gminil (43 against 57 minutes respectively, p<0,05), less time to accomplish the surgical technique (6.48 against 30.32 minutes respectively, p<0,05), and lower hospital stay (9,90 hours as against 41,7 hours respectively, p <0,05). There was no significant difference between the two groups regarding time to return to the habitual activities after surgery. To evaluate postoperative pain, a scale of 0-10 it was applied. Gmicrol present a lower pain score on the 1st and 2nd postoperative days (1.13 and 0.26 to Gmicrol and 4.52 and 1.14 to Gminil, respectively, p<0,05). There was no significant difference between immediate postoperative the most common complaint being pain at the site of pain and that on the 3rd postoperative day. Gminil presented a higher morbidity rate incision. To evaluate the satisfaction degree and esthetic effect, numeric values were attributed to as good, regular, poor and very bad as answered by the patiets. Gmicrol presented a higher satisfaction degree (p<0,05) and better esthetic effect as compared to Gminil (p <0,05). The microlaparoscopy standard cost was R$ 109.30 being lower than that of minilaparotomy. Conclusions: tubal ligation by microlaparoscopy, under local anesthesia and conscious sedation presented some advantages compared to minilaparotomy. |
publishDate |
2006 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2006-07-01 2014-05-27T11:21:53Z 2014-05-27T11:21:53Z |
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S0100-72032006000700005 Revista Brasileira de Ginecologia e Obstetricia, v. 28, n. 7, p. 403-409, 2006. 0100-7203 http://hdl.handle.net/11449/68941 10.1590/S0100-72032006000700005 S0100-72032006000700005 2-s2.0-33845503110 2-s2.0-33845503110.pdf 9476843874583499 |
url |
http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S0100-72032006000700005 http://hdl.handle.net/11449/68941 |
identifier_str_mv |
Revista Brasileira de Ginecologia e Obstetricia, v. 28, n. 7, p. 403-409, 2006. 0100-7203 10.1590/S0100-72032006000700005 S0100-72032006000700005 2-s2.0-33845503110 2-s2.0-33845503110.pdf 9476843874583499 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
por |
language |
por |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
Revista Brasileira de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia 0,292 |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
403-409 application/pdf |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
Scopus reponame:Repositório Institucional da UNESP instname:Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP) instacron:UNESP |
instname_str |
Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP) |
instacron_str |
UNESP |
institution |
UNESP |
reponame_str |
Repositório Institucional da UNESP |
collection |
Repositório Institucional da UNESP |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Repositório Institucional da UNESP - Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP) |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
|
_version_ |
1808128162096218112 |