2016, Number 08
<< Back Next >>
Ginecol Obstet Mex 2016; 84 (08)
Operative morbidity of the hidrodisección with epinefrina during the surgery for prolapse of pelvic organs
Calderón-Lara SA, Morgan-Ortíz F, Trapero-Morales M, Trapero-Corona IM, Peraza-Garay FJ
Language: Spanish
References: 12
Page: 484-490
PDF size: 334.18 Kb.
ABSTRACT
Objetive: To assess the effect of the hydrodissection on operative
morbidity and operative time in patients undergoing vaginal surgery
for pelvic organ prolapse.
Material and Method: Experimental, prospective, longitudinal,
comparative, randomized study: randomized controlled clinical. Randomly,
44 patients were assigned to receive management hydrodissection
with epinephrine (Group 1= 22) or not hydrodissection (Group
2= 22) prior to the start of the surgical procedure. The variables
analyzed were operative morbidity (defined as infection, hematoma
and surgical postoperative bleeding requiring transfusion) and surgical
time required to complete the procedure.
Results: The average age was 58.1 years (± 9.3) in the group of
hydrodissection and 63.0 years (± 10.6) in the group without hydrodissection
(p = .111). The frequency of postoperative complications was
similar enters both groups (p› .05) presenting only one case of
postoperative hematoma in Group 1 and none in Group 2. The
operative bleeding was significantly lower in the hydrodissection group
(240.9 ± 111.9 mL) compared with the group of non hydrodissection
(324.1 ± 104.9 mL). No significant difference in operative time was
found (p = 0.67) compared with 135.5 (± 22.6) minutes in Group 1
and 139.3 (± 32.5) minutes.
Conclusions: Hydrodissection with epinephrine compared with
non Hydrodissection significantly reduces operative bleeding but no
differences in operative morbidity and operative time in patients undergoing
vaginal surgery in the management of pelvic organ prolapse.
REFERENCES
Olsen AL, Smith VJ, Bergstrom JO, Colling JC, Clark AL. Epidemiology of surgically managed pelvic organ prolapse and Urinary incontinence. Obstet Gynecol 1997;89(4):501-506.
Weber AM, Abrams P, Brubaker L, Cundiff G, Davis G, Dmochowski RR, et al. The standardization of terminology for researchers in female pelvic floor disorder. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct 2001;12(3):178-86.
Bump RC, Mattiasson A, Bo K, Brubaker LP, DeLancey JO, Klarskov P ,et al. The standardization of terminology of female pelvic floor dysfunction. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1996;175(1):10-17.
Julian TM, Johnson GW, Josewehr JA, O´Connell BJ. Vasopressin as a chemical tourniquet during vaginal surgery. J Gynecol Surg 1993;9(3):161-164.
Ascher-Walsh CJ, Capes T, Smith J, Michels A. Cervical vasopressin compared with no premedication and blood loss during vaginal hysterectomy: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol 2009;113(2): 313-318.
Martin-Hirsch PP, Keep SL, Bryant A. Interventions for preventing blood loss during the treatment of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2010 Jun 16;(6):CD001421.
Lensen EJ, van den Berg-van Erp SH, Stoutjesdijk JA, Hasaart TH, Withagen MI, Kluivers KB, et al. Does the method of dissecting in anterior colporraphy lead to a difference in thickness of removed vaginal tissue? Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2013;168(1):112-6
Howells RE, TuckerH, MillinshipJ, ShroffJF, DharKK, Jones PW et al. Comparison of the side effects of prilocaine with felypressin and lignocaine with adrenaline in large loop excision of the transformation zone of the cervix: results of a randomised trial. Br J Obstet Gynecol 2000;107(1):28-32.
England GT, Randall HW, Graves WL. Impairment of tissue defenses by vasoconstrictors in vaginal hysterectomies. Obstet Gynecol 1983;61(3):27-2741.
Speer P, Unger J. Does saline really decrease blood loss at vaginal hysterectomy as much as vasopressin? J Pelvic Surg 2001;7(6): 340-343.
Potter T, Fletcher H, Reid M. Vasopressin as a hemostatic and dissection aid at vaginal hysterectomy. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2004; 86(1): 65-66.
Kammerer-Doak DN, Rogers RG, Johnson Maybach J, Traynor Mickelson M. Vasopressin as an etiologic factor for infection in gynecologic surgery: a randomized double-blind placebo-controlled trial. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2001;185(6):1344-1347.
Full text