Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
The investigator's aim in this study is to compare the results of tubal ligation surgery, one of the contraceptive methods, between different surgical techniques. 194 patients were included in the study. Of these patients, 104 had vaginal approach, 44 had laparotomic and 46 had laparoscopic tube ligation surgery. These surgical techniques are statistically was compared; Visual Analog Pain Scale (VAS) after surgery, in terms of duration of surgery, length of hospital stay, cost to hospital and amount of blood loss. As a result of the analysis; tubal sterilization technique performed with vaginal colpotomy were found to be more successful than other techniques; Visual Analog Pain Scale score, postoperative hospital stay, operation time and cost.
The study compared the peroperative effects and postoperative results of different surgical techniques with three different techniques in patients undergoing tubal sterilization.
surgical techniques used:
A total of 194 patients were included in the study. Tubal ligation was performed in 44 patients with mini laparotomy, 46 patients with laparoscopy and 104 patients with posterior colpotomy technique.
The following parameters were evaluated in the study
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Label | Type | Description | Intervention Names |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mini Laparotomic | Active Comparator | In patients undergoing spinal anesthesia, a suprapubic 3-5 centimeter incision was entered into the abdomen. After both tubes were isolated, bilateral tube ligation was performed by Pomeroy method. After bleeding control was achieved, it was repaired in accordance with the anatomy of the abdomen. |
|
| Laparoscopic | Active Comparator | In patients undergoing general anesthesia, Verres was inserted into the abdomen through the umbilicus. Pneumo peritoneum was created with carbon dioxide (CO2). Optical imaging was placed into the abdomen from the umbilicus with 10-trochar. Auxiliary trochars from 3 centimeter supero-medial of both spina iliaca anterior superior were placed in the abdomen. bilateral tubas were isolated. Bilateral tubal ligation was performed with the help of bipolar cautery. bleeding control was achieved. trochars were taken out of the abdomen. the skin was closed. |
|
| posterior colpotomy | Active Comparator | The patient underwent spinal anesthesia and was placed in a high lithotomy position. cervical uteri was observed with the help of speculum. A 3 centimeter vertical incision was opened 2 centimeter below the cervix uteri. Peritoneal cavity was entered from this area. bilateral tubas were isolated. Bilateral tubal ligation was performed using the pomeroy method. bleeding control was achieved. peritoneal and posterior cervical incision line was repaired. |
|
| Name | Type | Description | Arm Group Labels | Other Names |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| tubal sterilization | Procedure |
|
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Visual Analog Pain Scale (VAS) | postoperative pain degree. 0-10 point. 0 worst, 10 best | postoperative 6th hour |
| Visual Analog Pain Scale (VAS) | postoperative pain degree. 0-10 point. 0 worst, 10 best | postoperative 24th hour |
| the amount of bleeding | preoperative and postoperative hemogram differences | 24 hour |
| length of hospital stay | postoperative hospitalization | 48 hour |
| duration of surgery | The time from the administration of anesthesia to the end of the operation | minimum duration of surgery 15 minute, maximum duration of surgery 60 minute |
Not provided
Not provided
Inclusion Criteria:
Exclusion Criteria:
an operation for female
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Name | Affiliation | Role |
|---|---|---|
| serhat yıldız | AKU | Study Director |
Not provided
| PubMed Identifier | Type | Citation | Retractions |
|---|---|---|---|
| 30640233 | Background | American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists' Committee on Practice Bulletins-Gynecology. ACOG Practice Bulletin No. 208: Benefits and Risks of Sterilization. Obstet Gynecol. 2019 Mar;133(3):e194-e207. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0000000000003111. | |
| 12564171 | Background | Schlaeder G, Boudier E. [Tubal sterilization]. Rev Prat. 2002 Oct 15;52(16):1790-4. French. |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D013246 | Sterilization, Tubal |
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D013509 | Gynecologic Surgical Procedures |
| D013519 | Urogenital Surgical Procedures |
| D013514 | Surgical Procedures, Operative |
| D013245 | Sterilization, Reproductive |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| 20339859 | Background | Chang WH, Liu JY, Yeh YC, Wu GJ, Chiang YJ, Yu MH, Chen CH. Tubal ligation via colpotomy or laparoscopy: a retrospective comparative study. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2011 Apr;283(4):805-8. doi: 10.1007/s00404-010-1435-z. Epub 2010 Mar 26. |
| 10389725 | Background | Harkki-Siren P, Sjoberg J, Kurki T. Major complications of laparoscopy: a follow-up Finnish study. Obstet Gynecol. 1999 Jul;94(1):94-8. |