Repository logo
 

Publication:
Estudo comparativo de vias de acesso cirúrgico na contracepção cirúrgica feminina: Microlaparoscopia versus minilaparotomia

dc.contributor.authorModotte, Waldir Pereira [UNESP]
dc.contributor.authorDias, Rogerio [UNESP]
dc.contributor.authorFrei, Fernando [UNESP]
dc.contributor.authorDias, Daniel Spadoto [UNESP]
dc.contributor.authorFernandes, Flávio Ferreira [UNESP]
dc.contributor.institutionUniversidade Estadual Paulista (Unesp)
dc.date.accessioned2014-05-27T11:21:53Z
dc.date.available2014-05-27T11:21:53Z
dc.date.issued2006-07-01
dc.description.abstractPurpose: 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.en
dc.description.affiliationPrograma de Pós-Graduação em Ginecologia, Obstetrícia e Mastologia Faculdade de Medicina de Botucatu Universidade Estadual Paulista Júlio Mesquita Filho UNESP, Botucatu (SP)
dc.description.affiliationBioestatística Faculdade de Ciências e Letras de Assis Universidade Estadual Paulista Júlio Mesquita Filho UNESP, Assis (SP)
dc.description.affiliationDepartamento de Ginecologia, Obstetrícia e Mastologia Faculdade de Medicina de Botucatu Universidade Estadual Paulista Júlio Mesquita Filho UNESP, Botucatu (SP)
dc.description.affiliation, R. Nagila Jubran - 40 - Jd. Europa, 19840-470 - Assis - SP
dc.description.affiliationUnespPrograma de Pós-Graduação em Ginecologia, Obstetrícia e Mastologia Faculdade de Medicina de Botucatu Universidade Estadual Paulista Júlio Mesquita Filho UNESP, Botucatu (SP)
dc.description.affiliationUnespBioestatística Faculdade de Ciências e Letras de Assis Universidade Estadual Paulista Júlio Mesquita Filho UNESP, Assis (SP)
dc.description.affiliationUnespDepartamento de Ginecologia, Obstetrícia e Mastologia Faculdade de Medicina de Botucatu Universidade Estadual Paulista Júlio Mesquita Filho UNESP, Botucatu (SP)
dc.format.extent403-409
dc.identifierhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S0100-72032006000700005
dc.identifier.citationRevista Brasileira de Ginecologia e Obstetricia, v. 28, n. 7, p. 403-409, 2006.
dc.identifier.doi10.1590/S0100-72032006000700005
dc.identifier.file2-s2.0-33845503110.pdf
dc.identifier.issn0100-7203
dc.identifier.lattes9476843874583499
dc.identifier.scieloS0100-72032006000700005
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-33845503110
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11449/68941
dc.language.isopor
dc.relation.ispartofRevista Brasileira de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia
dc.relation.ispartofsjr0,292
dc.rights.accessRightsAcesso aberto
dc.sourceScopus
dc.subjectContraception
dc.subjectLaparoscopy/methods
dc.subjectLaparotomy/methods
dc.subjectRetrospective studies
dc.subjectSterilization
dc.subjectTubal/methods
dc.titleEstudo comparativo de vias de acesso cirúrgico na contracepção cirúrgica feminina: Microlaparoscopia versus minilaparotomiapt
dc.title.alternativeComparative study of female surgery contraception access: Microlaparoscopy versus minilaparotomyen
dc.typeArtigo
dcterms.licensehttp://www.scielo.br/revistas/rbgo/paboutj.htm#3
dspace.entity.typePublication
unesp.author.lattes9476843874583499
unesp.author.orcid0000-0002-3354-8430[3]
unesp.campusUniversidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP), Instituto de Biociências, Botucatupt
unesp.campusUniversidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP), Faculdade de Medicina, Botucatupt
unesp.departmentGinecologia e Obstetrícia - FMBpt
unesp.departmentBioestatística - IBBpt

Files

Original bundle

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
2-s2.0-33845503110.pdf
Size:
442.56 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format