Logo do repositório

Comparison of postoperative outcomes between different dissection techniques during laparoscopic cholecystectomy in rabbits: randomized study

dc.contributor.authorVera, María Camila Maldonado [UNESP]
dc.contributor.authorWittmaack, Monica Carolina Nery [UNESP]
dc.contributor.authorConceição, Maria Eduarda Bastos Andrade Moutinho [UNESP]
dc.contributor.authorFaccini, Rachel Inamassu [UNESP]
dc.contributor.authorSembenelli, Guilherme [UNESP]
dc.contributor.authorMontanhim, Gabriel Luiz [UNESP]
dc.contributor.authorde Menezes, Mareliza Possa [UNESP]
dc.contributor.authorIdo, Cléber Kazuo [UNESP]
dc.contributor.authorAires, Luiz Paulo Nogueira [UNESP]
dc.contributor.authorCarra, Gabriel João Unger [UNESP]
dc.contributor.authorMoraes, Paola Castro [UNESP]
dc.contributor.institutionUniversidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)
dc.date.accessioned2025-04-29T19:29:25Z
dc.date.issued2024-01-01
dc.description.abstractPurpose: Laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) is the gold standard for the treatment of gallbladder (GB) disease in small animals. The aims of this study were to investigate and compare the effect of different types of dissectors during LC in rabbits; electrothermal bipolar vessel sealing device (EBVS-LigaSure) and standard electrosurgical dissection (bipolar Maryland) for dissection of the GB in LC, correlating liver function tests (LFTs) in pre and postoperative periods (days 0, 3, 7, 15); macroscopic checking 15 days after surgery through necropsy; histopathological, bacteriological through bacterial growth by culture and intraoperative complications. Methods: Twenty rabbits were used, group (n = 10) using EBVS for GB dissection and cystic duct seal (GLL), and group (n = 10) using bipolar dissecting forceps and EVBS for cystic duct seal (GLE). Results: A higher concentration of alkaline phosphatase was observed on GLL 15 days after surgery when compared to GLE. In addition, GLE resulted in a higher concentration of alanine aminotransferase at three days when compared to GLL. Conclusion: In LC no significant statistical differences were found between EBVS and bipolar Maryland; both devices are equally safe and effective in LC. Further studies are required to evaluate the effectiveness of these devices in animals with gallbladder pathologies. Therefore, clinical studies are necessary.en
dc.description.affiliationUniversidade Estadual Paulista School of Agricultural and Veterinarian Sciences Department of Clinic and Veterinary Surgery, SP
dc.description.affiliationUnespUniversidade Estadual Paulista School of Agricultural and Veterinarian Sciences Department of Clinic and Veterinary Surgery, SP
dc.description.sponsorshipCoordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior (CAPES)
dc.description.sponsorshipFundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (FAPESP)
dc.description.sponsorshipConselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (CNPq)
dc.description.sponsorshipIdCAPES: 2017/23402-8
dc.description.sponsorshipIdFAPESP: 2017/23402-8
dc.description.sponsorshipIdCNPq: 307791/2021-1
dc.description.sponsorshipIdCAPES: 33004102069P8
dc.description.sponsorshipIdFAPESP: 33004102069P8
dc.identifierhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1590/acb396324
dc.identifier.citationActa Cirurgica Brasileira, v. 39.
dc.identifier.doi10.1590/acb396324
dc.identifier.issn1678-2674
dc.identifier.issn0102-8650
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-85208168268
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/11449/303353
dc.language.isoeng
dc.relation.ispartofActa Cirurgica Brasileira
dc.sourceScopus
dc.subjectAdhesions
dc.subjectCholecystectomy
dc.subjectElectrosurgery
dc.subjectLaparoscopy
dc.subjectRabbits
dc.titleComparison of postoperative outcomes between different dissection techniques during laparoscopic cholecystectomy in rabbits: randomized studyen
dc.typeArtigopt
dspace.entity.typePublication
relation.isOrgUnitOfPublication3d807254-e442-45e5-a80b-0f6bf3a26e48
relation.isOrgUnitOfPublication.latestForDiscovery3d807254-e442-45e5-a80b-0f6bf3a26e48
unesp.author.orcid0000-0002-0979-0825[1]
unesp.author.orcid0000-0001-7191-2320[2]
unesp.author.orcid0000-0002-6939-2183[3]
unesp.author.orcid0009-0009-9306-2123[4]
unesp.author.orcid0000-0002-3912-6423[5]
unesp.author.orcid0000-0002-9830-041X[6]
unesp.author.orcid0000-0002-0294-5126[7]
unesp.author.orcid0000-0003-2167-6010[8]
unesp.author.orcid0000-0003-3229-9396[9]
unesp.author.orcid0000-0003-1355-1955[10]
unesp.author.orcid0000-0002-0255-2971[11]
unesp.campusUniversidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP), Faculdade de Ciências Agrárias e Veterinárias, Jaboticabalpt

Arquivos