Laparoscopic tubal sterilization. Methods, effectiveness, and sequelae.

作者: Rebecca M. Ryder , Mary C. Vaughan

DOI: 10.1016/S0889-8545(05)70059-0

关键词:

摘要: The following statements summarize the material presented herein. 1. Although laparoscopic tubal ligation remains an effective and widely available form of birth control throughout world, cumulative failure rates may be higher than previously reported, patients should appropriately counseled, with special attention to younger women. 2. Proper surgical technique is important in reducing rates, particularly regard applying clips or using bipolar cautery. Teaching institutions employ strict guidelines for instructing residents most techniques. 3. overall ectopic pregnancy are lower after (as true any control), ensure from a failed procedure, there 30% 80% chance pregnancy. Consideration given earlier ultrasound documentation location 4. There little evidence support PTLS biologic standpoint. data on increased hysterectomies post-tubal result multiple factors, women aged less 30 years at time occlusion. 5. majority report satisfaction sterilization, thorough counseling all cannot overemphasized. Women completely aware alternatives possibly encouraged try another method prior permanent sterilization.

参考文章(83)
GH Lipscomb, TG Stovall, JA Ramanathan, FW Ling, Comparison of silastic rings and electrocoagulation for laparoscopic tubal ligation under local anesthesia. International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics. ,vol. 41, pp. 216- 216 ,(1993) , 10.1016/0020-7292(93)90742-F
Narchi P, Benhamou D, Fernandez H, Mazoit Jx, Postoperative pain after local anesthetics for laparoscopic sterilization. Obstetrics & Gynecology. ,vol. 84, pp. 877- 880 ,(1994)
D. Baram, S. Stinson, C. Smith, Intraoperative topical etidocaine for reducing postoperative pain after laparoscopic tubal ligation. Journal of Reproductive Medicine. ,vol. 35, pp. 407- 410 ,(1990)
Arthur McCausland, High rate of ectopic pregnancy following laparoscopic tubal coagulation failures. Incidence and etiology. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology. ,vol. 136, pp. 97- 101 ,(1980) , 10.1016/0002-9378(80)90573-6
Gallagher P, Denton Gw, Schofield Jb, Uncommon complications of laparoscopic sterilisation. Annals of The Royal College of Surgeons of England. ,vol. 72, pp. 210- 211 ,(1990)
J C Raeder, U Kirste, P E Børdahl, J Nordentoft, A Refsdal, Laparoscopic sterilization under local or general anesthesia ? A randomized study Obstetrics & Gynecology. ,vol. 81, pp. 137- 141 ,(1993)
Cowan Bd, Jutras Ml, Fox, Long Ca, Meeks Gr, Laparoscopic Pomeroy tubal ligation as a teaching model for residents. Journal of Reproductive Medicine. ,vol. 39, pp. 862- 864 ,(1994)
Levy Bs, Soderstrom Rm, Dail Dh, Bowel injuries during laparoscopy. Gross anatomy and histology. Journal of Reproductive Medicine. ,vol. 30, pp. 168- 172 ,(1985)
Edward E. Wallach, George R. Huggins, Steven J. Sondheimer, Complications of female sterilization: immediate and delayed Fertility and Sterility. ,vol. 41, pp. 337- 355 ,(1984) , 10.1016/S0015-0282(16)47709-5
Lynne S. Wilcox, Susan Y. Chu, Elaine D. Eaker, Scott L. Zeger, Herbert B. Peterson, Risk factors for regret after tubal sterilization: 5 years of follow-up in a prospective study. Fertility and Sterility. ,vol. 55, pp. 927- 933 ,(1991) , 10.1016/S0015-0282(16)54301-5