Comparison of silastic rings and electrocoagulation for laparoscopic tubal ligation under local anesthesia

Gary H. Lipscomb, Thomas G. Stovall, Jaya Ramanathan, Frank W. Ling

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

16 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objective: To compare objectively the pain associated with tubal occlusion by Silastic rings versus electrocoagulation during laparoscopic tubal ligation under local anesthesia. Methods: Consecutive patients scheduled for laparoscopic tubal ligation under local anesthesia were randomized to Silastic rings (N = 50) or electrocoagulation (IV = 52) as the method of tubal occlusion. Sterilization was performed under local anesthesia in a standard fashion. Bupivacaine 0.5% was used as the local anesthetic agent. Operative pain was measured based on intraoperative anesthesia requirements and a modified McGill pain questionnaire. This questionnaire was used to assess pain at 15 minutes, 1 hour, and 24 hours postoperatively. Results: Demographics were similar for the two groups. Operative time was shorter in the Silastic-ring group (16.7 versus 21.8 minutes; P =.001), and this group also required less intraoperative anesthesia (P =.004). There were no statistical differences between the groups in self-reported pain intraoperatively or postoperatively. No patient in either group required antiemetics or pain medication in the recovery room. Conclusion: Silastic rings appear preferable to bipolar electrocoagulation for laparoscopic tubal sterilization under local anesthesia when long-acting local agents are used for tubal anesthesia.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)645-649
Number of pages5
JournalObstetrics and Gynecology
Volume80
Issue number4
StatePublished - Jan 1 1992

Fingerprint

Tubal Sterilization
Electrocoagulation
Local Anesthesia
Pain
Anesthesia
Recovery Room
Antiemetics
Bupivacaine
Pain Measurement
Operative Time
Local Anesthetics
Anesthetics
Demography
baysilon

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Obstetrics and Gynecology

Cite this

Comparison of silastic rings and electrocoagulation for laparoscopic tubal ligation under local anesthesia. / Lipscomb, Gary H.; Stovall, Thomas G.; Ramanathan, Jaya; Ling, Frank W.

In: Obstetrics and Gynecology, Vol. 80, No. 4, 01.01.1992, p. 645-649.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Lipscomb, Gary H. ; Stovall, Thomas G. ; Ramanathan, Jaya ; Ling, Frank W. / Comparison of silastic rings and electrocoagulation for laparoscopic tubal ligation under local anesthesia. In: Obstetrics and Gynecology. 1992 ; Vol. 80, No. 4. pp. 645-649.
@article{b6ae240c5adf4bb69e0ea5615956a9ce,
title = "Comparison of silastic rings and electrocoagulation for laparoscopic tubal ligation under local anesthesia",
abstract = "Objective: To compare objectively the pain associated with tubal occlusion by Silastic rings versus electrocoagulation during laparoscopic tubal ligation under local anesthesia. Methods: Consecutive patients scheduled for laparoscopic tubal ligation under local anesthesia were randomized to Silastic rings (N = 50) or electrocoagulation (IV = 52) as the method of tubal occlusion. Sterilization was performed under local anesthesia in a standard fashion. Bupivacaine 0.5{\%} was used as the local anesthetic agent. Operative pain was measured based on intraoperative anesthesia requirements and a modified McGill pain questionnaire. This questionnaire was used to assess pain at 15 minutes, 1 hour, and 24 hours postoperatively. Results: Demographics were similar for the two groups. Operative time was shorter in the Silastic-ring group (16.7 versus 21.8 minutes; P =.001), and this group also required less intraoperative anesthesia (P =.004). There were no statistical differences between the groups in self-reported pain intraoperatively or postoperatively. No patient in either group required antiemetics or pain medication in the recovery room. Conclusion: Silastic rings appear preferable to bipolar electrocoagulation for laparoscopic tubal sterilization under local anesthesia when long-acting local agents are used for tubal anesthesia.",
author = "Lipscomb, {Gary H.} and Stovall, {Thomas G.} and Jaya Ramanathan and Ling, {Frank W.}",
year = "1992",
month = "1",
day = "1",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "80",
pages = "645--649",
journal = "Obstetrics and Gynecology",
issn = "0029-7844",
publisher = "Lippincott Williams and Wilkins",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Comparison of silastic rings and electrocoagulation for laparoscopic tubal ligation under local anesthesia

AU - Lipscomb, Gary H.

AU - Stovall, Thomas G.

AU - Ramanathan, Jaya

AU - Ling, Frank W.

PY - 1992/1/1

Y1 - 1992/1/1

N2 - Objective: To compare objectively the pain associated with tubal occlusion by Silastic rings versus electrocoagulation during laparoscopic tubal ligation under local anesthesia. Methods: Consecutive patients scheduled for laparoscopic tubal ligation under local anesthesia were randomized to Silastic rings (N = 50) or electrocoagulation (IV = 52) as the method of tubal occlusion. Sterilization was performed under local anesthesia in a standard fashion. Bupivacaine 0.5% was used as the local anesthetic agent. Operative pain was measured based on intraoperative anesthesia requirements and a modified McGill pain questionnaire. This questionnaire was used to assess pain at 15 minutes, 1 hour, and 24 hours postoperatively. Results: Demographics were similar for the two groups. Operative time was shorter in the Silastic-ring group (16.7 versus 21.8 minutes; P =.001), and this group also required less intraoperative anesthesia (P =.004). There were no statistical differences between the groups in self-reported pain intraoperatively or postoperatively. No patient in either group required antiemetics or pain medication in the recovery room. Conclusion: Silastic rings appear preferable to bipolar electrocoagulation for laparoscopic tubal sterilization under local anesthesia when long-acting local agents are used for tubal anesthesia.

AB - Objective: To compare objectively the pain associated with tubal occlusion by Silastic rings versus electrocoagulation during laparoscopic tubal ligation under local anesthesia. Methods: Consecutive patients scheduled for laparoscopic tubal ligation under local anesthesia were randomized to Silastic rings (N = 50) or electrocoagulation (IV = 52) as the method of tubal occlusion. Sterilization was performed under local anesthesia in a standard fashion. Bupivacaine 0.5% was used as the local anesthetic agent. Operative pain was measured based on intraoperative anesthesia requirements and a modified McGill pain questionnaire. This questionnaire was used to assess pain at 15 minutes, 1 hour, and 24 hours postoperatively. Results: Demographics were similar for the two groups. Operative time was shorter in the Silastic-ring group (16.7 versus 21.8 minutes; P =.001), and this group also required less intraoperative anesthesia (P =.004). There were no statistical differences between the groups in self-reported pain intraoperatively or postoperatively. No patient in either group required antiemetics or pain medication in the recovery room. Conclusion: Silastic rings appear preferable to bipolar electrocoagulation for laparoscopic tubal sterilization under local anesthesia when long-acting local agents are used for tubal anesthesia.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0026672904&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0026672904&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

VL - 80

SP - 645

EP - 649

JO - Obstetrics and Gynecology

JF - Obstetrics and Gynecology

SN - 0029-7844

IS - 4

ER -